231–240 of 522 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I can't see it today. I won't remember about looking at your post tomorrow, but I will remember that your website didn't work for a few hours yesterday, so I probably will not visit again. I don't really care how you implement your fediserve gimmick, I haven't received it. Seems like lots of people will not receive it either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hacker News discourages "editorializing" the title, which means there's incentive to repeat what's being linked to exactly. Most of the time, it's a good thing, but in cases like this is where this falls over. (You can also see this in the other direction parent comment, for what it's worth, "Jack Dorsey's New Twitter" isn't really accurate, as far as I'm concerned. It is more informative overall, though.)
Describing or at least providing context is not editorializing. I don't know how this "discouragement" is phrased, but it should instead encourage (if not require) that titles mean something to a general audience (at least as represented by HN's users). I am routinely down-modded and even banned for merely asking for more-descriptive titles. It's anti-user, anti-community, anti-usefulness, and douchey. All we needed…
Absolutely. I'm not saying that I think that the title here is good. Just that I understand why it ended up as the title.
> I don't know how this "discouragement" is phrased,
You can find the guidelines here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
To quote the relevant part:
> Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize.
That's it.
> (which I don't have a grasp of, even after following the cryptic link)
I described it over here, if you're still curious: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35820670
This is the second time one of my posts has caused issues for the chaos.social admins. I am so, so sorry. The hacker news DDOS is real. Previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34691489
The interesting thing to consider is that someone who is popular to read may well be as much of a headache for the local sysop as someone who is a frequent target for attacks. How long until they have a 'bot that just 429s all of your posts on sight, do you think? (-:
It's not beyond the bounds of possibility. Compare https://github.com/mastodon/mastodon/issues/15431 .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Clearly they're not microservicing hard enough.
I suggest making the current team explain to 4 new teams how to port it to something fast, like elixir and rust (both!) Probably messaging with pulsar and the build system from python 4, too. I read this in a whitepaper. Let’s do this, guys! ;)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anything touching the DNS records for the root of your entire web presence is not simple and needs substantial review.
Adding a new DNS record for a new, specific purpose is simple and low-impact, technically.
How many “low-impact” things have been compromised over the years, I wonder?
This is a terrible implementation of domain verification. dns-01 and http-01 are more or less standardized at this point. Use them, and don't roll your own. Reference: https://letsencrypt.org/docs/challenge-types/ .
I don't get http-based verification in general. If you want to really prove someone owns a domain, make them change an authoritative DNS record. Everything else feels like it is begging for edge cases to crop up. Why should my social media or SSL certificate vendor care about my web servers?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The interesting thing to consider is that someone who is popular to read may well be as much of a headache for the local sysop as someone who is a frequent target for attacks. How long until they have a 'bot that just 429s all of your posts on sight, do you think? (-:
On a more serious note: Given that many user communities in the FediVerse are people conscious of their privacy and of suffering pile-ons by large majorities of outsiders, I wonder how many more examples of this there will be before people start asking the developers for out-of-the-box defaults that simply blacklist all requests that come in with referrer headers containing news.ycombinator.com and other similar "Sla…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think crossdomain.xml died with Flash but I could be wrong, does anyone know?
None of the standardized web technologies use crossdomain.xml, but I think Acrobat Reader still uses it for... stuff. And acrobat still has a browser plugin, so I guess it's still a potential vector for abuse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> .well-known seems unintuitive We're talking about folks setting up a custom domain for a personal social media presence. If they can handle nameservers and DNS records, they can handle a folder with a dot in the name.
They can and probably should but what if they decide not to? That's the problem with expecting people to agree with and follow standards.
You've effectively described what happens when people don't agree.
> 429 Too Many Requests Aight, level with me: Is every mastodon server running on a Raspberry Pi?
This post is on the front of HN. Many a larger website have succumbed to HN's warm embrace.