HN user

pizzetta

528 karma
Posts2
Comments148
View on HN

How can one tell how much is being saved through your service compared to contracting directly with a SaaS (Box, Okta, for example.) keeping in mind, that rarely are list prices what small companies pay to begin with, though admittedly, larger companies can get bigger discounts.

When technical issues come up, does one get support directly from the vendor; if not, how does that work?

With 77 Billion they could have:

-Built better transit to North Bay.

-Built/Complete Bart circuit around the Bay Area.

-Built HSR to reach exurbs of Gilroy (S), Tracy (E), and Napa (N).

That would have given breathability to the bay area.

“bombarded” with “thousands of videos, images and livestreamed broadcasts of child sexual abuse, rape, torture, bestiality, beheadings, suicide and murder,”

Those aren't "shitty users" those are vile and criminal people doing extremely horrible things and sharing them. Most or many of those people should be, where possible, referred to local authorities for judicial processing. FB can very well ID these offenders. It's not like they don't collect enough information to know who they are.

If you need RAW file archival, then most photo sites will not work and you will have to use OneDrive, Box, etc. Most free photo sites will convert or require conversion to popular compressed formats. That may be okay with many/most, however, some people will want to retain original files.

Waze Carpool 8 years ago

You make a good point. However, you imply that the watchful eye of HR would prevent this happening and yet Google is not sex-crimes free. I grant that it may show up in lower numbers but these things will show up in a years-long program.

Waze Carpool 8 years ago

Google does decent support for their paid services. Free is different but paid tends to be decent.

Waze Carpool 8 years ago

They have probably worked those issues out by dogfooding this internally already, don't you think?

It's not like they just thought it up and didn't test it out internally as they are wont to do. Those issues were likely discovered and have mitigation. Googliness only gets people to be nice to a point.

That only goes so far. One only has to look into "gutter oil"(1) to see that reputation is not always paramount in vendors' minds.

(1)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gutter_oil

Also, the GI tracts of people in developed nations are more susceptible to some pathogens than people who have been exposed to those pathogens from an early age and have survived those pathogens in their foodsource.

It's a bit late for the economist to come out with this.

They should have come out against the invasion of Iraq or the campaign to destabilize the middle east after that.

Why now that we're beginning to disengage from the world? It's a bit strange to see some dissonance: on the one hand they don't want America to disengage from the world on the other hand we're too in love with our military.

Hasn't Assange said that the campaign reached out to them? Opposition research is not extraordinary. Wasn't it revealed the Trump Dossier was paid ofr by Podesta/DNC?

They all do the same stuff.

That said, what has WikiLeaks published that has turned out untrue?

[fixed Pedestal/Podesta autocomplete]

That's interesting, so at first Twitter wanted RT to spend more on the election, to do more exposes and journalism with the elections as a backdrop because having RT and others on their platform would be good for the company (and the electorate having more information?)

But this was before they were against it --now apparently they, Twitter, had made a bad calculus and RT might have benefitted the eventual winner more than the then presumed winner.

That would make sense if the odds had been plus or minus 5 pts but by all accounts the odds were something like 93:7 in Hillary's favor. I don't think Russian intelligence had better understanding of our electorate than the DNC itself --they can't have been that out of touch with the people they were looking to represent.

Has a conspiracy to have someone elected been confirmed? IFAIK, Russian ops was to sow distrust in the electorate not so much to favor one candidate over the other.

The ultimate goal would be to have the elections questioned by the losers (whoever the winner was) in order to diminish US influence abroad as the winner would be busy with internal affairs. It was probably a bet against Hillary winning since she had a more hawkish international vision.

Also, Conventional weapons take great effort.

One guy in N Korea with a nuclear weapon at his disposal vs Cuba and no nuclear weapon and we can see how difficult it is to imagine Cuba posing a real destabilizing threat vs N Korea.

W/o nuclear weapons, N Korea, in order to invade S Korea and overwhelm it would need millions of troops clothed and fed for months, logistical support, etc. A couple of bombs and the same is achieved without spending billions a month in maintaining troop and armaments levels.