Readit News logoReadit News
TomSwirly commented on Seattle shuts down gifted program for having too many white and Asian students   nypost.com/2024/04/03/us-... · Posted by u/Melchizedek
slekker · 2 years ago
This will get flagged in 3..2..1.. the comment section is already a cesspool :^)
TomSwirly · 2 years ago
And the New York Post is not a reliable source.
TomSwirly commented on First human case of avian flu in Texas   politico.com/news/2024/04... · Posted by u/puttycat
SketchySeaBeast · 2 years ago
I would hope that the majority learned that hygiene and masking are effective enough for us to continue to live our lives, but I doubt it.
TomSwirly · 2 years ago
There are over a million dead in the United States for whom your statement is not true.
TomSwirly commented on Unraveling Havana syndrome: New evidence implicates the GRU's assassination unit   theins.ru/en/politics/270... · Posted by u/dilyevsky
TomSwirly · 2 years ago
> "Long COVID"

which is completely real and scientifically verified, despite your scare quotes.

I might add that nothing in your link claims that Gulf War Syndrome is psychogenic.

TomSwirly commented on Government of the NIMBY, for the NIMBY, by the NIMBY   viewfromcullingworth.com/... · Posted by u/vwoolf
delfinom · 2 years ago
They said "own new homes". So it's not an existing house and was probably a development job.

And of course they probably never attempted to get electrical utility planning permission until they already sunk money into construction.

The same actually very rarely happens in the US, where utilities of all kinds have capacity planning that can result in a denial of services for new hookups.

TomSwirly · 2 years ago
No, brand-new homes - see my other comment.
TomSwirly commented on Government of the NIMBY, for the NIMBY, by the NIMBY   viewfromcullingworth.com/... · Posted by u/vwoolf
givemeethekeys · 2 years ago
How is it that someone purchased a home that can not receive electricity? Was the home sold for much cheaper, since the electricity was, "up to the buyer" to figure out?
TomSwirly · 2 years ago
There is a huge housing crisis in the Netherlands, so people purchase homes before they are built, and sometimes a group of people get together to build homes that way.

In order to do this, you need to have all your permits in order. Unfortunately, the energy companies announced out of the blue that they didn't have enough energy to accommodate all their new obligations...

TomSwirly commented on Government of the NIMBY, for the NIMBY, by the NIMBY   viewfromcullingworth.com/... · Posted by u/vwoolf
mewpmewp2 · 2 years ago
I have hard time grasping the NIMBY concept. How does it have a negative connotation? Why would anyone out of the blue willingly make their personal area worse? It's like asking for a quite significant donation out of nowhere. All of those things affect your property value and life quality, why should anyone out of the blue have to be compelled to do that? If that is the case, they should be paid appropriately for the damage that a new building/infra causes there. You should spread out the damage, so increase taxes for everyone, and pay the damage from those taxes in a fair way.

I would also be opposed to anything that makes my neighborhood less desirable, it's all a property value drop. If my property is right now 300k, and new development makes it 250k, it's like I'm making a 50k donation out of nowhere. Now imagine, I bought the property on loan, and I owe 300k, and I have to essentially hand out 50k.

Why not also shame anyone who is unwilling to make donations that everyone else aren't compelled to make? If it's taxes, it's fine, but it makes no sense to have random or directed donation asks.

TomSwirly · 2 years ago
> Why would anyone out of the blue willingly make their personal area worse?

Because infrastructure has go somewhere.

The Netherlands has this issue: everyone resists any energy infrastructure in their area. Now there are many people who own new houses who can't move in because there's no electric power for them. Nuclear power is impossible because of NIMBY, so 85% of the energy is fossil fuel based.

TomSwirly commented on Tell HN: Reddit now blocks VPN access via browser, 'old' subdomain included    · Posted by u/thih9
keepamovin · 2 years ago
This is IP based blocking. You can get around it by creating a Reddit account, or logging in. I Just did that on my remote browser app, the demo of which is here:

https://puter.com/app/cloudtabs-browserbox

If you read past the "Woah, there pardner." You'll see a paragraph that says, Try logging in or creating an account here to get back to browsing.

This works. You can use reddit if you just create an account or sign in.

I guess this is IP-based blocking to counter bots.

edit: Oh boy, these tiny servers are not meant for this kind of hug. They may suffer!

TomSwirly · 2 years ago
> "Woah, there pardner."

Cutesie error messages aren't funny even the first time, and by the tenth time they are wildly annoying.

> if you just create an account

"Just"

TomSwirly commented on Cognition Labs Seeks $2B Valuation   wsj.com/tech/ai/a-peter-t... · Posted by u/atomlib
ignoramous · 2 years ago
What's wrong with them buying you coding assistants? Sounds to me like more time on hand to prolong those movie nights.

In seriousness, the upside with code assistants is increasingly clear. And may be the bet that these would continue to improve quadratically is worth taking if you're a VC. In fact, PG argues that buying into hype cycles is the default: https://paulgraham.com/herd.html

TomSwirly · 2 years ago
How is it clear that coding assistants have an upside for anyone past a complete beginner?

So far, the utility on existing codebases is less than zero.

> continue to improve quadratically

Using what metric?

TomSwirly commented on Vultr is now claiming full perpetual commercial rights over all hosted content   old.reddit.com/r/selfhost... · Posted by u/RyeCombinator
diggan · 2 years ago
> You missed the "in any way that Vultr deems appropriate" clause. This is a classic weasel phrase which means they can do as they please.

No, I didn't, but you again missed the full context. Neither of those terms can be considered in isolation, so again:

> You hereby grant to Vultr a non-exclusive [...] in any way that Vultr deems appropriate [...] for purposes of providing the Services to you

So unless it's for the purpose of providing you the service, it doesn't matter what Vultr "deems" appropriate.

Feel free to check this with a lawyer if you feel unsure.

TomSwirly · 2 years ago
I did not miss the full context.

"Deemed" in particular doesn't require any sort of reasoning or argument for the company to make any decision it likes. And "appropriate" is not a synonym for "necessary".

"Why did you sell my data?" "We deemed it appropriate for the purposes of providing the Services to you."

What's your legal refutation to this under US law?

(In the EU, this whole clause would possibly be unenforceable from the start, but I know a lot less about EU law.)

TomSwirly commented on Vultr is now claiming full perpetual commercial rights over all hosted content   old.reddit.com/r/selfhost... · Posted by u/RyeCombinator
j16sdiz · 2 years ago
The cause is retrained by

"... for purposes of providing the Services to you."

if you take the narrowest read, it would allow them to store or cache them. That's it.

TomSwirly · 2 years ago
The phrase "in any way that Vultr deems appropriate" does not encourage a narrow read.

It is a wildcard that allows them to do whatever they want with the data and then argue, "We deemed it appropriate."

u/TomSwirly

KarmaCake day953October 3, 2019View Original