131–140 of 148 posts
Is there a single website, where i can look what Creditcards are not accepted in NYC (for bars, shops, restaurants, ect...)
Some people around call me a stingy-parsimonious, and during next holidays i want to bring it on top!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the tension between us is that you think 'private' means 'visible only to me', and I think private means 'never displayed to any other user, or on a public page'. There are a thousand routine tasks that require me to have unrestricted access to bookmarks and URLs. I try to be as uninvasive as I can about it, but you have no way of verifying that. If you want something to remain truly private to you—and I say…
It seems like "private" could be defined as, "This is my stuff, and if you want access to it, then come ask me. It's okay if you accidentally access it, but if you want to intentionally look through it, ask me first." It seems hard to argue that most people wouldn't feel that way about their own private stuff. I fully understood the implications of giving you the data. I'm a fan of your work and your writing, and I h…
Re-evaluate. You can often dig your way out of these stupid message board holes by simply apologizing. It's worked for me repeatedly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You seem to have a weird understanding of web services. All of pinboard's servers belong to pinboard. All of pinboards hard drives belong to pinboard. All of the bits on those hard drives belong to pinboard. Your private data on pinboard's server belongs to pinboard. This is how web services work. If the web service couldn't access its own data, it wouldn't be able to operate. You can only assume that some bits are y…
If the web service couldn't access its own data, it wouldn't be able to operate. He intentionally created a program to trawl through data which was explicitly marked by users as private. He didn't do that for operational reasons.
It is much better to lose an argument, even one you're right about, than to be a liar.
Link rot is a serious problem: http://www.gwern.net/Archiving%20URLs#link-rot >In a 2003 experiment, Fetterly et al. discovered that about one link out of every 200 disappeared each week from the Internet. McCown et al. (2005) discovered that half of the URLs cited in D-Lib Magazine articles were no longer accessible 10 years after publication [the irony!], and other studies have shown link rot in academic literature…
My own research (which I hope to publish soon) shows a slightly better link rot rate for bookmarked URLs (which are presumably ones people are most interested in keeping). The attrition rate I see so far is roughly linear and about 5% a year. Which is still shocking by any non-web standard, but a little better than the figures cited above.
>My specific target date is 2070, 60 years from now. As of 10 March 2011, gwern.net has around 6800 external links (with around 2200 to non-Wikipedia websites)4. Even at the lowest estimate of 3% annual linkrot, few will survive to 2070. If each link has a 97% chance of surviving each year, then the chance a link will be alive in 2070 is 0.972070−2011=0.16 (or to put it another way, an 84% chance any given link will die). The 95% confidence interval for such a binomial distribution says that of the 2200 non-Wikipedia links, ~336-394 will survive to 20705. If we try to predict using a more reasonable estimate of 50% linkrot, then an average of 0 links will survive (0.502070−2011×2200=1.735×10−16×2200≃0). It would be a good idea to simply assume that no link will survive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the web service couldn't access its own data, it wouldn't be able to operate. He intentionally created a program to trawl through data which was explicitly marked by users as private. He didn't do that for operational reasons.
No, once again, what you just wrote is a lie. You can be cavalier with logic, consistency, tone, thoughtfulness, thoroughness, and even basic correctness. You cannot be cavalier with immediately evident facts. No amount of squirreling back to how Pinboard actually touches private links in this experiment will ever make what you wrote here truthful. It is much better to lose an argument, even one you're right about, t…
You didn't even explain how, precisely, I'm a liar.
You know what a liar is? It's someone who deliberately goes out of their way to distort the truth in order to gain some kind of advantage, even when they know they're not being truthful.
Do you think I'm sitting here trying to win this debate merely because I have a problem with being wrong? If that's the case, then I had no idea you thought so lowly of me. This isn't about even about me.
Fact: When a user submits a bookmark to Pinboard and flags the bookmark as 'private,' they have a reasonable expectation of privacy. That includes privacy from the admin: it's acceptable for them to use the data for debugging or to test new features, but not to write a script whose purpose is to delve through data marked as private.
Fact: The owner deliberately wrote a script whose purpose was to go through private data. You can read the original blogpost on the topic. It doesn't matter that it was for an experiment for the betterment of all of the web. The fact is, he didn't seek consent, and users had no idea their data that they flagged as 'private' were being examined by his script.
Now, you can call me a charlatan, a dilettante, or whatever other harmful thing you wish to call me, but I have no idea how this case warrants me being called a liar. Normally, I'd let this drop, but you have publicly targeted my character and reputation. I'd like an explanation, please.
On the downside: stuff hosted by others might go away. Web pages, web services, apps requiring server side support...
Investing a lot in a service makes it more painful to lose, like the apparently discontinued Amazon Cloud Drive (supposed to be a cheaper Dropbox): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8219257
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, once again, what you just wrote is a lie. You can be cavalier with logic, consistency, tone, thoughtfulness, thoroughness, and even basic correctness. You cannot be cavalier with immediately evident facts. No amount of squirreling back to how Pinboard actually touches private links in this experiment will ever make what you wrote here truthful. It is much better to lose an argument, even one you're right about, t…
This is the most hurtful comment I've ever received on HN, and it's the only one that's ever made me want to leave the site altogether. You didn't even explain how, precisely, I'm a liar. You know what a liar is? It's someone who deliberately goes out of their way to distort the truth in order to gain some kind of advantage, even when they know they're not being truthful. Do you think I'm sitting here trying to win t…
You have options available to you besides seething about this and leaving the site.
Curiosity: what's your Pinboard account name? Mine's the same as my HN name.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the most hurtful comment I've ever received on HN, and it's the only one that's ever made me want to leave the site altogether. You didn't even explain how, precisely, I'm a liar. You know what a liar is? It's someone who deliberately goes out of their way to distort the truth in order to gain some kind of advantage, even when they know they're not being truthful. Do you think I'm sitting here trying to win t…
Yes. I'm saying you've gone out of the way to distort the truth. Exhibit A: your second "fact": not a fact . What the site is actually doing is right there in the link the guy who runs the site showed you. You have options available to you besides seething about this and leaving the site. Curiosity: what's your Pinboard account name? Mine's the same as my HN name.
It's not a direct quote since I'm on mobile, because I had to get out of the house and go for a walk after one of my heroes called me a liar. But it's factually accurate. What part isn't?
I'd like an answer to this question: Would you hire a liar? Someone you believe would go out of their way to be deliberately untruthful? Rather than even try to figure out if there was some sort of misunderstanding, you went straight for calling me a liar. You, of all people.
I am not seething. I'm quite hurt.
Also, the fact that half of all Pinboard links are marked 'private' should give some indication that people commonly use Pinboard as a repository for links they don't want to associate with themselves publicly. That's what we're paying for.
EDIT: Here's the full quote, from https://blog.pinboard.in/2014/08/researching_link_rot/
To run the experiment, I am going to be drawing a few thousand links at random from the entire pool of Pinboard bookmarks. This will include private bookmarks, which make up about half the Pinboard collection.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. I'm saying you've gone out of the way to distort the truth. Exhibit A: your second "fact": not a fact . What the site is actually doing is right there in the link the guy who runs the site showed you. You have options available to you besides seething about this and leaving the site. Curiosity: what's your Pinboard account name? Mine's the same as my HN name.
From the blogpost: "The data we will examine will include private bookmarks, which make up about half of all Pinboard bookmarks." It's not a direct quote since I'm on mobile, because I had to get out of the house and go for a walk after one of my heroes called me a liar. But it's factually accurate. What part isn't? I'd like an answer to this question: Would you hire a liar? Someone you believe would go out of their…
He intentionally created a program to trawl through data which was explicitly marked by users as private.
And here's what you wrote earlier:
you'd specifically and intentionally create a program whose sole purpose was to analyze private user data and report on the results.
He did no such thing.
Perhaps, instead of directing all your energy into maximizing the feels you generate from being called on something, you could instead introspect and re-evaluate and consider that maybe you said something very wrong. People do that all the time. They do not ritually kill their accounts when that happens. The older, wiser ones are likely to just acknowledge it and apologize. Some of the somewhat younger, dumber ones, like me, have done that too.
We are both crudding the thread up now, so I'm going to stop posting about this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the web service couldn't access its own data, it wouldn't be able to operate. He intentionally created a program to trawl through data which was explicitly marked by users as private. He didn't do that for operational reasons.
No, once again, what you just wrote is a lie. You can be cavalier with logic, consistency, tone, thoughtfulness, thoroughness, and even basic correctness. You cannot be cavalier with immediately evident facts. No amount of squirreling back to how Pinboard actually touches private links in this experiment will ever make what you wrote here truthful. It is much better to lose an argument, even one you're right about, t…