catiopatio
If you can’t understand your own incoherent argument, I can’t help you.
See also: Western Democracy.
Remind me again which government was responsible for the deadliest famine in human history?
https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2023/country-chapters/china
Instead, your post employs a series of rhetorical tactics aimed at stifling constructive dialogue:
First, you assert a false equivalency between China and the USA/EU by trivializing the qualitative difference in freedom levels, thereby attempting to normalize authoritarianism.
Second, you use a slippery slope argument about social media moderation to suggest that all limitations on freedom are essentially the same — equating limited, private content moderation with systemic human rights abuses by government.
Third, you engage in an ad hominem attack by accusing me of being influenced by propaganda without providing substantive counter-arguments.
Were I to adopt your approach, I could easily make similar sweeping ad hominem accusations based on your behavior here.
This ventures firmly into the realm of conspiracy theory.
Do you feel you are presenting objective facts, as opposed to participating in disinformation or propaganda?
1. False Equivalence: Suggesting that economic progress and freedom of speech are interchangeable or mutually exclusive is intentionally misleading.
2. Relativism: By stating there's "no objective way" to compare, you are deflecting any form of critical evaluation.
3. Unfalsifiability: Your assertion that any evaluation is "inherently biased" is an unfalsifiable claim meant to immunize your argument from critique.
On top of which, they did such a terrible job of lifting people out of poverty, they unnecessarily killed tens of millions in the deadliest famine in human history:
Feel free to read the yearly reports from the HRW:
https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2023/country-chapters/china
Random selection from the report:
> In May, a court in Hainan province sentenced former journalist Luo Changping to seven months in prison for a Weibo post that questioned China’s justification for its involvement in the Korean War.
Details on his case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luo_Changping#Arrest
> Sanya Ji'an Police Bureau summoned Luo for investigation into his "illegal remarks" suspected of "insulting heroes and martyrs".
Censorship in China: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_China
Four Cardinal Principles (enshrined in the constitution): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Cardinal_Principles
Open Constitution Initiative (shut down by the government): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Constitution_Initiative
The issues are plain, endemic, and well-documented. It is not propaganda.
You comment on this issue a surprising amount, and clearly feel strongly about the US’ views on China. I’d be curious as to exactly how you feel China is being judged unfairly.
Short of the time I was hit by a car, I’ve never had a bicycling emergency — road or mountain — that I wasn’t able to walk away from through some combination of hoping obstacles and/or putting the bike down in a controlled side-skid.
AFAIK there are no such standards (mandatory or voluntary) applied to Onewheel’s devices.
They could have voluntarily applied hardware and software standards from other safety fields (e.g. automotive engineering), but they apparently chose not to.
As the peer commenter said: move fast and break bones.
It’s useful information. Wear a damn helmet.
Helmets save lives, and isn’t it literally their job to inform us of such facts?
No, it’s not.
ISPs have no right to know who I am speaking to or why.
I have nothing against Flighty, but background notifications are trivial and all apps can and should be using them to solve this type of problem — it’s detrimental to have folks mistakenly operating under the belief that this is complex or unusual.
Sure, the payload size is limited, but it’s not impossibly small, and custom keys with arbitrary payload are explicitly and obviously documented as supported.
Do you work on Flighty? I truly cannot understand where on earth this level of effusiveness for using a simple API — as documented and designed — is coming from. It’s inane.
Background notifications can and do carry arbitrary application data, and are used to update the application state in the background.
This is their intended purpose, it’s what they’re documented to do, it’s how Apple intends them to be used, and it’s common application behavior.
This is literally a plainly documented feature of the platform. It’s not clever or unique or unusual — it’s a simple feature that Apple specifically documents.
I cannot even begin to fathom why people are confused about this, and it’s truly mind-boggling that this has required a thread at all.
Slack/Discord/Teams are non-native applications that do not leverage the platform’s support for updating application state via notifications. That does not mean the use of background notifications is unusual or rare. It is not.
You’re the one with an extraordinary claim here — that applications aren’t using such a basic, documented, widespread feature.
It’s patently silly and I have no idea why you’re so self-assured in your ignorance.
Do you genuinely believe it’s uncommon for applications to leverage this useful, trivial, long-standing platform API for its intended and explicitly documented purpose?
I can’t imagine why you’d believe that, but another commenter already provided the requested single example up-thread.
All it requires is reading the two pages of documentation for this supported feature:
“Pushing background updates to your App — Deliver notifications that wake your app and update it in the background.”
https://developer.apple.com/documentation/usernotifications/...
> No one is asking for a survey of apps that do this. You’re making the claim that it’s far from rare, so you have enough knowledge to make this claim. Share with us the smallest piece of your knowledge by naming one single other app that does this. It’s the least you can do since you’re making the claim. Please, I’m very curious!
I can’t share that information.
It’s a trivial, documented, supported, long-standing API for a common use-case.
It is widely used, as documented, for its intended purpose.
It’s also the trivial, obvious approach to anyone who asks the question “how can I push data to the application when it’s not running.”
Push notifications aren’t some odd “alternative pipe” and conveying data via push notifications is a known and supported use-case.
This strikes me as HN’s own unique style of toxic positivity.
They’re using push notifications. That’s not amazing engineering work. It’s literally a built-in, supported, documented feature:
“Pushing background updates to your App — Deliver notifications that wake your app and update it in the background.”
https://developer.apple.com/documentation/usernotifications/...
The payload supports custom keys that may contain arbitrary application data.
It’s also the trivial, obvious approach to anyone who asks the question “how can I push data to the application when it’s not running.”