DaveMebs

They didn’t pull out in WA, they just stopped offering really cheap plans that were easy to cancel. They continued to offer higher-end LTC Insurance.

If the manager doesn't support a reasonable amount of vacation time, then there are almost certainly other issues. It is hard for me to fathom the intersection of "good manager" and "doesn't support vacation time" not being NULL. If someone is in this situation, they should vote with their feet - the manager clearly doesn't have their best interests at heart, and this will impact them on multiple dimensions.

You think it is highly unlikely that Facebook/Meta is selling granular user data?

Git was developed as an OSS clone of BitKeeper (which was originally provided freely to Linux kernel developers under the agreement that they not develop a clone).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitKeeper

Requirements: Live streaming uses Apple’s HTTP Live Streaming (HLS) technology. HLS requires an iPhone, iPad, or iPod touch with Safari on iOS 7.0 or later, a Mac with Safari 6.0.5 or later on OS X v10.8.5 or later, or a PC with Microsoft Edge on Windows 10. Streaming via Apple TV requires an Apple TV (2nd or 3rd generation) with software 6.2 or later or an Apple TV (4th generation).

I don't see taxes listed as a line item in the comparison, which is a huge factor. WA State does not have income tax.

80% of hops in America come from the Yakima Valley, which is in Eastern Washington. They even have a large hop festival every year. I think this presence influences the beer scene dramatically.

If you can establish self-sustaining societies on multiple planets you eliminate humanity's greatest threat - the fact that Earth is a single point of failure.

If you take the Ballard Connector to MSFT it is not that bad. 45-60 minutes depending on traffic. With the new 520 work on the Eastside, the carpool lanes are speeding things up dramatically and I expect it's closer to 45 most days (I'm in Phinney currently, and I'm usually at 45-50 minutes on the last stop).

But if the DRM solution is implemented through JS code in the browser, it is trivial to pirate. I know DRM is always broken, etc., but at the same time it is hard to take an argument at face value that discounts the security differences between these approaches.

JS is trivial for anyone moderately skilled to crack - you're sending content in the clear from the browser through the stack.

DRM solutions enabled by EME can be much more robust and difficult to crack.

Similar to other commentators, I struggle with the issue, but just saying "put it in JS" is not a very compelling argument. The current EME approach of a publically defined API that any DRM solution can plug into feels like a pretty reasonable compromise here.

The legal terms state "A User owning physical media must use VidAngel’s filtering service to permit the streaming of Filtered Video Content to the User’s device."

Section 5.2 at https://www.vidangel.com/legal/terms

This sure makes it sound like filtering is believed to be required to make the movie legal to stream.

I really struggle to believe VidAngel would build a feature to turn away customers because it is not their market focus. It just doesn't make sense as an engineering investment decision - it is easier and more profitable to allow any number of filters (with 0 being a valid number).

Please read the article before posting. The author specifically discusses the fact that astronauts show signs of aging more rapidly despite the fact that small doses of radiation can be good for your health.

These are site-specific implementation issues, and have nothing to do with the DASH ISO standard.

DASH is purely an XML format for describing server-side content. The issues you are describing have nothing to do with DASH and are due to implementation decisions in both the JS player and the underlying MSE object.

Just because more words exist, does not mean the authors make use of these words. I think the author would agree that English has more words - he cites the dictionary sizes skewing heavily in favor of English.

With that said, I am also surprised. I would like to see a similar analysis using more modern works, as well as a discussion around how texts are selected. It seems like the selection of authors and their novels will significantly impact the results.

FWIW - Both English and French stem from the same original language (Proto-Indo-European). You are correct that English is a Germanic language (this does not mean it stems from German), and the French is a Romance language - with Romance being used in the sense of "came from Rome," not "sounds sexy." If you are interested in more details here, I highly recommend "The History of English" podcast: http://historyofenglishpodcast.com/ I'm still working my way through it, but it does a great job explaining the history of the English language, how it evolved, how it relates to other languages, etc.

English contains words from many other languages. It is not just Latin words, but many more recent languages (such as French) as well.

#2 and #3 are explicitly points being addressed by jet.com.

Re #2: The entire Jet model is the more you buy the more you save. Taking the baseball example, it's pretty easy to infer when they see you are buying cleats and a glove that they will up-sell you with a bat as well and call out the bundle discount you will receive.

Re #3: The article explicitly discusses that the founder is trying to create an "anti-Amazon" culture that values people and relationships. You can agree or disagree with this approach, but you can;t deny they are actively trying to promote a great culture to work in (no performance reviews, for example).

This is not to say that Jet.com is going to nail it, but you can't dismiss Jet.com's efforts here out of hand either.

Please don't spread FUD. I've never tried to find the EULA before, but it appears to be pretty simple.

1) Go to www.microsoft.com 2) Search "windows 8 eula" (http://search.microsoft.com/en-us/results.aspx?form=MSHOME&m...) 3) Click the top link to download the EULA

Same thing worked when I tried "windows 7 eula" (http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/search/results.aspx?form=MSHO...)

These are also top results when I try the same query on Google.

Did you even try to find it?

And if you see multiple requests on your phone, you know it's an attack and you should reject both. The criticism is basically "someone might see a bunch of requests and, not knowing which is theirs, approve them all." If someone is that foolish, you're already in trouble.

If you write an HTML/JS, it will always run on all architectures.

If you write a .NET/XAML app, by default it will be compiled to a CPU neutral IL that runs on all architectures (you can disable this and target a specific CPU architecture).

If you write a C++/XAML app, by default Visual Studio will compile different versions of the app for each architecture.

For the vast majority of Win8 apps, "converting" to ARM is just a cross-compile. It is only when you are doing very specialized things that you actually need to worry about the CPU architecture your app will be running on.

Why do you consider these to be mutually exclusive forms of input? Just because you can touch a screen doesn't mean that all other forms of input are no longer applicable.

Really? What technology is being misunderstood here? As far as I can tell, the AG is mandating that mobile apps include privacy policies detailing how they gather and collect user information. Given the large number of stories about apps sending user data to 3rd parties or using it for things other than a user may expect/desire that have come out over the past few years, this doesn't seem particularly unreasonable. Now, you may disagree that mobile app developers should be required to post these policies, but I don't see how such a position reflects a misunderstanding of the technologies at play.

I'm also hard pressed to imagine how this is an "assault on product development freedom." If you don't gather any data, it's not too tough to state somewhere "hey, just wanted to let you know that this app respects your privacy and does not collect any usage data or personal information." If your app does gather data, I think it's pretty reasonable to ask for a basic privacy policy to be posted. I, for one, would prefer that mobile apps that send PII be required to explain what and why.

Overall this looks like a reasonable extension of existing laws to include new technologies that have come to prominence in the last few years. Do you think the existing law requiring online services to post privacy policies is an assault on product development freedom? Or is it only because they are extending this to mobile that you are losing your freedom to create software products?

Yeah, it's probably not worth the time investment to make sure employees are rewarded for their work in an equitable manner. If they can't sell it, why bother?

It's illegal to sell below the cost of materials, I believe. Cost of assembly does not factor in.

> they are also going to try to make it a replacement for cable tv. This is something Sony and Microsoft have not tried to do with their consoles, which confuses me.

Comcast and Microsoft just announced a deal...

http://blog.comcast.com/2011/10/xfinity-on-demand-coming-soo...

The author clearly has not spent much time using Word lately, and reading this I was constantly struck by the blatant inaccuracies throughout this piece. Some of his biggest complaints just don't align with modern versions of the software he is criticizing:

1) He start's with a rant about Clippy, which hasn't shipped for multiple releases.

2) He complains about the XML markup when you want to publish something to the Web through copy-paste. Has the author ever saved a Word document prior to publishing before? There are a variety of choices when saving a file, including the options to save as Plain Text (which removes all formatting), or even as a web page. No idea if the save as web page feature works well for complex documents, but to overlook this when complaining about publishing a Word doc as a web page demonstrates woeful ignorance of the product being criticized. This is especially ridiculous considering he highlights 3rd party programs that convert .docx into .txt. Why not mention that Word does this out of the box?

3) "The fundamental unit of Word is the single, proprietary file, anchored to one computer. Microsoft showed users how it feels about sharing work when it switched its default format from .doc to .docx in Office 2007, locking old and new Word customers out of each other's files." As far as I can tell, the author pulled this one out of his ass. The 2nd Google search result for ".docx" returns a link to a compatibility pack released by MSFT allowing earlier versions of Word to open .docx files. The 3rd result is the Wikipedia page for "Office Open XML," which is the standards-based format that all Office documents are saved in. (The 1st result is a free online 3rd party .docx to .doc conversion service.)

And these were just the things that immediately jumped out at me....

There are plenty of valid criticisms of Word and ways in which the software can be improved (apparently feature discovery...), but by not understanding how to use even the most basic features such as "Save to Plain Text," I have difficulty putting much stock in this individuals personal gripes.

(Disclaimer: I work for MSFT, but not within the Office division. The above is my own personal opinion, etc., etc.)

It's amazing how many people either dismiss PowerShell out of hand because it's different, or don't even think about it when talking about Windows commandline support. Getting .NET objects returned, rather than piping text around is awesome. So is having an IDE specifically for writing PowerShell scripts. I'm still learning PowerShell, and love bash, but as powerful as bash is, in some ways it feels very primitive in comparison. If PowerShell 15 years old when bash was released, would anyone consider it better than PowerShell?

Google may or may not have higher employee satisfaction, but I sure wouldn't trust Glassdoor to know. This is based on an anonymous 20 question survey of "at least 115 employees" at each company, so you know that one of the two data sets only numbers 115 responses, implying a best-case response rate of 3.8% (Facebook at an estimated 3K employees). There is no information on how the sample set is gathered. Was it self selecting? What type of employees were consulted? Did they span management, or were they all individual contributors? How much can you really learn in 20 questions?

Furthermore, the "best tech company to work for list" that is linked in the article (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/facebook/facebook-named-best-tech-...) is another Glassdoor list, and a highly suspicious one at that. I compared it to the corresponding CNN/Fortune list (http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/best-companies/2012/f...), and out of the top 10 companies on the Glassdoor list, only 3 were on the top 100 Fortune list: Google, Facebook and REI. I've never even heard of 4 of the other 7, including the top 2, and of those 7, 5 aren't even on the CNN/Forbes top 100. On top of all this, this is supposed to be a tech list and it's filled with companies like General Mills, Southwest Airlines, Starbucks, Coach and FedEx, not to mention the fact that the top 2 are also both business consultancy firms.

I could go on, but I think the trend is pretty clear. Glassdoor appears to be basing these ratings on very small (and probably self selecting) samples sizes, and doesn't appear to have a very good means of gathering data from the right companies. Considering it's a relatively new company, this feels like something they want to make big, but they just don't have the brand and sway to implement a well designed study/survey/what-have-you.

If your curious what the CNN/Fortune study's methodology is: http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/best-companies/2012/f...

Did you read the article? He has been shipping the 2x version, however, was unaware that he needed to rebuild the app with a new drop of the tools that came out last week.

Anyone writing a virus already knows C++.

It's really unbelievable how this paper keeps getting cited as proof Microsoft is doing this too. Page 7 was cited on the other thread; you can read my response here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3615267

Re: Live doing it too. No, that is not what the paper says. From page 8:

"Only one of these websites, microsoft.com, displayed a full P3P policy."

"Websites under the msn:com domain exhibited a CP that includes the invalid CUSo token. Two other Microsoft owned sites, microsoft:com and windows:com use the same CP. These websites display the TRUSTe EU Safe Harbor Privacy seal. We believe that these websites are likely attempting to comply with P3P; however, they are not using P3P properly."

"The live.com CP does not include any ACCESS tokens. This CP suggests collection of PII, but does not provide any information about whether users can access their personal information."

Microsoft does not always fully comply with the letter of the law, but based on everything that I have read in that paper, they sure seem to be trying to comply with the spirit. It's ridiculous to claim that sending a deliberately misleading P3P header is the same as sending a P3P header that suggests PII is used but does not provide the access policy. One is designed to exploit a weakness in P3P and avoid blatantly lying to browsers in order to track users. The other indicates that PII is used, but does not fully specify how this is used. It seems fairly clear that one company is at least trying to support P3P, even if they are unable to completely reflect their privacy policy with these tokens. To claim these situations is analogous is fairly dishonest IMO.

(NOTE: Page numbers are based on the PDF document for quick access. Subtract 1 for the number printed on the bottom of the page.)