Readit News logoReadit News
shaka881 commented on Stop the paranoia: it doesn't matter if Google reads our email   maxmasnick.com/2012/02/12... · Posted by u/masnick
blakdawg · 14 years ago
I'd be a lot more impressed with that if they actually disclosed the identity of the requestors and the content they wanted searched/suppressed, at least as much as would be legally possible.
shaka881 · 14 years ago
I don't think it is legally possible. I believe these requests are usually accompanied by gag orders.
shaka881 commented on Why I use DuckDuckGo and You Should Too   blog.clifreeder.com/blog/... · Posted by u/ClifReeder
shaka881 · 14 years ago
In this age of SEO'd dreck and machine-generated content, I'll happily take a few "bubbles" over a static (read: gamable) ranking system.
shaka881 commented on British Facebook URL redirects to Google 404?   facebook.co.uk... · Posted by u/valgaze
shaka881 · 14 years ago
SCANDAL
shaka881 commented on Being on HackerNews, One week on   sharelatex.com/blog/posts... · Posted by u/beck5
shaka881 · 14 years ago
Collaborative typesetting is indeed cool, but the domain name promised far more excitement than it delivered.
shaka881 commented on Stop the paranoia: it doesn't matter if Google reads our email   maxmasnick.com/2012/02/12... · Posted by u/masnick
gst · 14 years ago
The point is that you're locked into a single provider and it's hard to switch. Using your own domain isn't much harder, looks more professional, and allows you to switch provider at any point in time.
shaka881 · 14 years ago
I love the shit out of Gmail, but I switched to Apps with my own domain for this reason. I've had my email address for much longer than Gmail's been around.
shaka881 commented on Stop the paranoia: it doesn't matter if Google reads our email   maxmasnick.com/2012/02/12... · Posted by u/masnick
dustingetz · 14 years ago
> what nefarious thing Google could do with my email that is in its interest and that would cause me harm

responding to government information requests without due process. google isn't in the business of protecting civil liberties.

i wonder if they're filtering our email on a mass scale for suspicious activities, as defined by Dept Homeland Security? if they were, it would be classified, and none of us would know the difference.

heck, turns out one of my buddies used to be a drug dealer, i had no idea, and at the time he was all over my social graph. i wonder if it will come up next time I apply for a security clearance. I might never know - an old manager once told me how clearance applications have a way of getting lost in the system when things aren't perfect - once eyebrows are raised, you enter a whole new set of processes and red tape that nobody wants to deal with.

shaka881 · 14 years ago
Actually, I would trust Google to challenge government subpoenas more than I would trust my current small webhost, which has probably next to no legal resources that would give it a chance in court.
shaka881 commented on Thunderbolt-DMA-land: Hacking Macs through the Thunderbolt interface   breaknenter.org/2012/02/a... · Posted by u/fourk
shaka881 · 14 years ago
This is some serious shit. We're doomed!
shaka881 commented on Pushing Files to the Browser Using Delivery.js, Socket.IO and Node.js   liamkaufman.com/blog/2012... · Posted by u/liamk
firefoxman1 · 14 years ago
But does it support file pushing? I think that's the only special thing about this library.
shaka881 · 14 years ago
It's not pushing, the browser still has to poll - it's just enqueueing files for transfer, right?

Even if that use case has some utility (of which I'm dubious), it still needlessly breaks the addressability semantics of URLs. It would be much better, in my opinion, to have the backend issue redirect to an unambiguous URL that refers to the static resource, then let the web server do the thing it's good at.

shaka881 commented on Perpetual Window into Gmail   wired.com/epicenter/2012/... · Posted by u/twentysix
leeoniya · 14 years ago
i'm not deeply familiar with OAuth, but it seems that each access token should have not just a revoke ability for the granter, but also a TTL/expiration date which can be altered or seen. i'm also not sure if there are more granular permissions or differentiating tokens, perhaps i want to share my contacts/address book but not my email, and only up to a max of 3 requests per month...
shaka881 · 14 years ago
Seems like it would be an easy thing to do from the OAuth provider's end - in addition to showing the scopes, you can put it into a few easy buckets:

24 hours, 7 days, 1 month, 1 year, indefinitely

u/shaka881

KarmaCake day28January 28, 2012View Original