Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

.io considered harmful

beep.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 254 posts

Re: .io considered harmful

#141

Post by deanCommie »

regnull wrote: post #48
KaiserPro wrote: post #40

The article starts with "everything is FACT" then ends with: Every .io domain you buy funds a government committing crimes against humanity. Every .io domain you renew legitimises and reinforces the continued exile of the Chagossians. which is hyperbole at best, and bollocks at worst. .io isn't sold or owned by the british (or US) government Most people don't understand what .io is for, moreover the UK goverment has…

Weird. Also: > And so, Britain traded the land illegally. Whoa, strong claim. Probably backed by facts below? Nope. At the same time, Wikipedia: > In November 1965, the UK purchased the entire Chagos Archipelago from the then self-governing colony of Mauritius for £3 million to create the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT). So, they bought it for 3 million pounds. Doesn't seem illegal to me.

There's an entire article here on horrific human rights abuses, and internationally recognized crimes against humanity.

But you're going to dwell on whether the first initial island purchase itself was "legal" being a strong claim?

Reevaluate your ethics. It's utterly irrelevant. Slavery was LEGAL.

Re: .io considered harmful

#142

Post by pelagicAustral »

nly wrote: post #78
KomoD wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> just a 'British entrepreneur' who bought the rights to multiple TLDs Not anymore, instead an American private equity firm

Bloody UK government can't hang on to anything

> Falkland Islands entered the chat

Re: .io considered harmful

#143

Post by beepbooptheory »

evantbyrne wrote: post #111
KaiserPro wrote: post #40

The article starts with "everything is FACT" then ends with: Every .io domain you buy funds a government committing crimes against humanity. Every .io domain you renew legitimises and reinforces the continued exile of the Chagossians. which is hyperbole at best, and bollocks at worst. .io isn't sold or owned by the british (or US) government Most people don't understand what .io is for, moreover the UK goverment has…

The invocation of "colonialism" in tech discussions tends to be a pretty reliable indication that what follows will be gibberish.

I'm just happy they are talking about it all! It's good to learn about things outside your main domain, especially with something like world history/geopolitics. Can you give examples of the gibberish? Genuinely fascinated to know what you are referring to.

This kind of stuff in particular can be pretty disheartening to learn about in general, and I find misinformation/pathos around it can often come from resistance to confronting the sadder, more terrible aspects of it. Which is totally understandable honestly! But I haven't heard of "gibberish" before.. you mean like being nonsensical? Like its hard to understand?

Edit: ok all the downvotes makes me think I am missing something here.. Is this kind of thing in the culture war now?? Like British empire history?? I know I'm not the smartest guy (by far), but I can't even guess what, like, the controversy could be here. Truly trying to have the discussion, and I give anyone permission to be mean and tell me how I am being dumb here, I'd just be happy to know precisely how I am being dumb here.

Re: .io considered harmful

#144

Post by mmh0000 »

angra_mainyu wrote: post #118
evantbyrne wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The invocation of "colonialism" in tech discussions tends to be a pretty reliable indication that what follows will be gibberish.

I was hoping we could keep our zealousness to tabs vs spaces, 2 vs 3 vs 4 vs 8 indentation levels, etc.

This is a good point you bring up. It is evident that everyone knows the correct level of indentation is a tab character that is four spaces wide; you never use spaces for indentation, only tab characters.

Any suitable programming language will immediately recognize a space as a typo and fail compilation.

Re: .io considered harmful

#145

Post by bigstrat2003 »

PhasmaFelis wrote: post #92
bigstrat2003 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I looked at the about page because of your comment, and wow you were right. I've rarely seen such a concentrated collection of "I'm a good person who believes good things" self-pats on the back. Really cringe.

Looking at the page, I assume you mean that she's queer and vaccinated? (And not concealing those things)

Mainly the vaccination thing. Your vaccine status is utterly irrelevant to a blog. There is zero reason anyone would state that unless they have a strong moral belief about vaccination and wish to make a public statement that they are doing the correct thing as they see it. It's really cringe, like I said. I don't conceal which vaccines I get - if it's relevant to the conversation I have no problem mentioning it. But neither do I proactively tell people so that they know I'm One Of The Good Ones.

I didn't even see the queer thing you mentioned, but I also left the page pretty quickly once I realized it was just going to be the author patting herself on the back for social status.

Re: .io considered harmful

#146

Post by Apocryphon »

fnordpiglet wrote: post #108
dijit wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Virtue signaling is the expression of a conspicuous, self-righteous moral viewpoint with the intent of communicating good character. It doesn't actually have to be virtuous, it only needs to signal virtue to others. Virtue signalling usually does not genuinely solve anything anyway it's merely supposed to impress upon you that "this person is good", that's the entire goal. Whether it's meaningful or not doesn't enter…

On the other hand, the article could also just be the expression of a strongly held personal belief about some injustice in the world. The virtue signaling meme tends to be a way of denigrating strongly held beliefs that conflict with the person calling “virtue signaling” in some way, and frankly is a virtue signal of its own. There’s literally no need to call people out for “virtue signaling” other than to stand up…

There should be a term to describe those who hurl accusations of virtue signaling as an act of virtue signaling. Virtue countersignaling, if you will.

Re: .io considered harmful

#147

Post by PrimeMcFly »

gowld wrote: post #100
regnull wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weird. Also: > And so, Britain traded the land illegally. Whoa, strong claim. Probably backed by facts below? Nope. At the same time, Wikipedia: > In November 1965, the UK purchased the entire Chagos Archipelago from the then self-governing colony of Mauritius for £3 million to create the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT). So, they bought it for 3 million pounds. Doesn't seem illegal to me.

That's like the Cuba buying Florida from the USA. Floridians wouldn't consider that "legal" People can't be legally bought and sold.

Land and territory can. If people don't like their new citizenship, they can leave.

Re: .io considered harmful

#148

Post by burke »

gowld wrote: post #100
regnull wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weird. Also: > And so, Britain traded the land illegally. Whoa, strong claim. Probably backed by facts below? Nope. At the same time, Wikipedia: > In November 1965, the UK purchased the entire Chagos Archipelago from the then self-governing colony of Mauritius for £3 million to create the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT). So, they bought it for 3 million pounds. Doesn't seem illegal to me.

That's like the Cuba buying Florida from the USA. Floridians wouldn't consider that "legal" People can't be legally bought and sold.

Legality is a concept defined by the governments doing the things. It's funny to see people react to something they perceive as immoral and just claim it's illegal.

I'm no legal expert but I'm reasonably confident one or both of Florida and the USA would find that to be an illegal transaction. Presumably Britain and Mauritius did not, at the time.

Re: .io considered harmful

#149

Post by Fnoord »

ozyschmozy wrote: post #112
thiht wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to work at a registrar and I completely agree with you. This is exactly my take as well (with a small exception for .eu, just don't use it) For your online identity (ie email address) I'd even go as far as suggesting not using a ccTLD at all, no matter if you check all the boxes. No fancy gTLD either, just use a .com. I don't think any TLD is remotely as reliable as this one (maybe .net because they're both Ve…

What's wrong with .eu domains?

Nothing, but Brits had to quit their .eu domains due to Brexit. Which seems reasonable to me. Of course, Brexit wasn't; it was manipulated by the Russians.

Re: .io considered harmful

#150

Post by yakubin »

immibis wrote: post #122
thiht wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to work at a registrar and I completely agree with you. This is exactly my take as well (with a small exception for .eu, just don't use it) For your online identity (ie email address) I'd even go as far as suggesting not using a ccTLD at all, no matter if you check all the boxes. No fancy gTLD either, just use a .com. I don't think any TLD is remotely as reliable as this one (maybe .net because they're both Ve…

A lot of sites use .org because .com is a bit censor-happy when it comes to certain topics.

What topics? I’ve never heard of it. Any examples of this happening?
Post reply on HN