calcifer

The article addresses that:

> If the answer is the salary, say it louder, and do not force yourself to make excuses.

> it'd be monstrous to mock the ambition on display

It's not "ambition" when it's what other people should do for you.

> Expelling people who have no particular attachment or roots to a given land is not ethnic cleansing.

And, pray tell, who decides if a person has "particular attachment or roots"? For example, would you be fine with me deciding if you do?

> but this kind of hyperbole

Looking at the linked DHH posts, which part(s) do you think make "ethnic cleansing" hyperbole? It seems like a pretty fair reading of his wishes to me.

> I don’t need a stair-climbing wheelchair that costs $30,000 and requires a maintenance crew. I need better doorknobs and/or a ramp. But a ramp is boring. You can't make investors have a hard on for a ramp that doesn't connect to the cloud. You can’t give a TED Talk about a ramp. You can’t get venture capital funding for a slightly wider doorframe.

Sorry yes, I meant the parliament.

There are very few ways of becoming PM without also being an MP. The PM must be able to sit in the parliament, so he must either be an MP or a member of the Lords. In theory, the current PM or even the King could make him a Peer, and therefore a member of the Lords, but neither is likely :)

It's a Blade Runner reference [1].

[1] https://bladerunner.fandom.com/wiki/Voight-Kampff_test

> Much as I hate to defend companies climbing to success and pulling up the ladder afterwards

Based on your post, you don't sound like you hate it at all.

You have freedom of speech to advocate for your politics. The rest of us have the freedom of association to not want to be involved with you in any way.

These are not contradictory - they are both essential freedoms.

The article has named sources for its quotes, whereas your comment relies entirely on "almost certainly" which sounds a lot less informed.

Archive link https://archive.ph/T39aS

> Things can be fun or interesting or worthwhile without being a harrowing battle of discovery!

The quoted sentences used "correct", "right" and "wrong". Hardly the sensationalist words you're implying.

Archive link https://archive.ph/8Ws7q

> Can someone with DMA legal knowledge translate and separate the spin?

The EU wants third-party providers to have access to the same features and UX that Siri has. When Apple says "the DMA requires Apple to give any AI system nearly unlimited access [...] That includes the ability to read and send messages, make purchases, access files, and execute actions across any app." they conveniently leave out that Apple's own AI has those abilities, which is what the DMA regulates against.

> The SDK’s config ships a flag “use_netifs”: true. That flag triggers code in the SDK binary that constructs its NWConnection with a specific required interface: en0 (WiFi) or pdp_ip0 (cellular), rather than using the system default route.

> On iOS, this bypasses any configured VPN’s tun0 interface entirely. The peer tunnel does not cross a user-configured VPN, even when the rest of the app’s HTTPS traffic does.

What's a legitimate use case for this API? When/why should an app be allowed to bypass a user-configured VPN?