nobody9999

>But the sore point right now is outside access, which Jellyfin really isn't made for. I set up Tailscale so I can connect Infuse to Jellyfin remotely. But that's not exactly as smooth as Plex. I can't give friends and family access, either, which was dead easy with Plex.

I'm confused about this bit. I installed jellyfin to provide outside access to me and my family/friends.

It wasn't difficult to make it available on the 'net, setting up new users is pretty simple and jellyfin has clients (both first and third party) for most platforms.

In fact, I went from never having used jellyfin to giving external access to friends/family within a few hours.

I'm sure I'm missing something, so if you wouldn't mind, I'd be very interested to hear your experience.

>Has it actually happened that someone went to court and the court told them no, you have to do binding arbitration? Or is it just something they put in the contract to scare you? Has anyone argued they didn't actually agree to what the country thinks they agreed to? You could start by just saying no, you didn't agree to that, and the company will have to prove you did.

Yes[0]. For over 100 years.

Next question?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbitration_case_law_in_the_Un...

>If you're only using it as a screen for the AppleTV, why connect it to the network at all?

Not GP, but I do so to make sure my TV doesn't try to connect to a different network. I provide specific IP addresses to the ethernet-connected interface and then block those IP addresses.

I suppose I could also move the TV to an isolated VLAN, but I spent months (the device was purchased nearly, or perhaps even more than, a decade ago) monitoring network traffic to determine to where (via DNS queries and packet captures) my TV was trying to phone home and blocked all egress for the TV and ingress from the sites/IP addresses to which the TV tried to connect.

I suppose that newer TVs might be sneakier (with the kind of WiFi surfing mentioned in TFA and/or installing cellular modems) in their attempts to bypass user control and when I need a new TV, I'll burn that bridge when I come to it.

But for now, my TV can't phone home. Or I'd have thrown it away years ago.

>The law matters very little when enforcing it in court often means a multiyear lawsuit against an opponent which employs an army of attorneys, has effectively unlimited amounts of money, will likely cost you ruinious sums of money, and for an outcome that's far from guaranteed.

Or when you can't even enforce anything in court as you've already given up your right to spend all your money suing, as binding arbitration is the required and only mechanism to "resolve disputes." To make it extra fair, the corporation pays the arbitration firm for their "objective" decisions and not you.

What could go wrong?

Original title too long. It was:

Mayor Mamdani’s Friendly Influencers and the Funding of Public Messaging in New York City

>The average income of Orange county California is over double the national. Safe to say this kind of lifestyle is reserved for the rich and not for the people.

The average income where I lived when I was five was not (nor was my family's) "double the national" and I walked to school (kindergarten and first grade) along this route[0][2] every school day.

In fact I tried to go to school during hurricane Agnes[1] and the strong winds actually pushed me back up the hill, so I went home -- no big deal.

In fact, I haven't even thought about that in decades. Ahh, childhood memories!

[0] https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Directions+from+5800+arlington+ave...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Agnes

[2] https://www.ps81.org/

>Sadly, I don't think it'd work today. People are too divided, it's too easy to import the votes you need, and people are too lazy to understand a law beyond the headline or what the news tells them about it.

And who and from where might folks "import" such votes? I don't understand what that means. Please do elucidate.

>I think the confusion of "no one should be persecuted for being part of group X" with "no one part of group X should be persecuted" is the root of far left ideology.

I think that no one should be persecuted[0]. Persecution is unfair harassment/injury/punishment. Perhaps you meant prosecuted[1] instead?

[0] from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/persecute

Persecute: transitive verb

1 : to harass or punish in a manner designed to injure, grieve, or afflict specifically : to cause to suffer because of belief

2 : to annoy with persistent or urgent approaches (such as attacks, pleas, or importunities) : pester

[1] from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prosecute

Prosecute: transitive verb

3 : to bring legal action against for redress or punishment of a crime or violation of law b : to institute legal proceedings with reference to prosecute a claim

>You shouldn't ask for disprove studies if you don't provide proof studies.

My point was that we don't know what the long-term effects of vaping are. Because there hasn't been time for the longitudinal studies that will tell us what those effects are.

I requested studies refuting those claims because I know they don't exist. I also know that studies confirming such claims don't exist either.

Making the statement that "...vaping is still unhealthy but less than smoking plant matters" is disingenuous because we have no idea what long-term (note that qualification) effects vaping does or does not have.

It might be that vaping increases human lifespan by 80%. Or it might be that vaping decreases lifespan by 25%. Or it might be that vaping either causes or prevents dementia. We just don't know. It may be that none of those things apply. Who knows? Not me. And not you or anyone else. Yet.

Because vaping hasn't been widely used for long enough to make claims about its long-term effects.

My claims are just as valid as yours ("...vaping is still unhealthy but less than smoking plant matters").

That was my point. My apologies for expecting you to make the conceptual leap and understand the above by making similarly unsupported claims as the one you made. I guess that wasn't the best way to do so. I'll try to do better in the future.

I hope I've cleared up your confusion.

>Vaping is not healthy but there is a lot less material inhaled. No fine particles which do real damage.

Propylene glycol covers the alvoelae and over time (~15-20 years) blocks uptake of oxygen, causing respiratory failure and a slow, painful death.

Vegetable glycerine coats the lungs and over time (~10-25 years) blocks fluid from draining out of the lungs, causing congestive heart failure/pulmonary edema. Which ends up causing one to drown in their own bodily fluids and a slow, painful death.

If you disagree, please cite any long term studies that disprove the above. Thanks!

>It's impossible for most people to envision an economy without them

It's possible that's the case because (at least in the US) 68% of GDP is consumer spending[0]. As such, 2/3 of the economy is "them."

[0] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DPCERE1Q156NBEA/

Just in case anyone didn't get the reference (I forgot to include the link -- mea culpa).

A Pap smear[0] is a diagnostic test to detect (pre)cancerous cells on one's cervix[1].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pap_test

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cervix

>Most hospital claims and bills are actually coded around day rates and DRGs, so even if the aspirin shows up as a line item it doesn't actually impact the patient's financial responsibility or the amount allowed by their health plan. (I'm not trying to defend such a confusing system, just explaining how it works.)

Yep. Hospital "bills" are a fiction. On one occasion I was presented with an "Explanation of Benefits" for a hospital stay where I was "charged" for being in two hospital rooms at the same time. As if that weren't enough I was also "charged" with having a "Pap smear"[0], even though I don't have a cervix.

I complained bitterly and after making a big stink was informed by the hospital my insurer that the items weren't actually "billed". Rather, the insurance company paid $1500/day regardless of the treatment provided.

It's disgusting!

>If "free speech" was a valid defense for you, then Meta would be doing the same.

Is that some sort of in joke? Meta loves more surveillance, more data and more info about their vassals^W users.

I'm sure their lobbyists were pushing hard to get this law passed.

I don't live in or near Seattle. And while I do live in a state with a comparable minimum wage, many folks do not.

Let's try that in Texas, Georgia, Oklahoma or one of the 17 other states with a $7.25 minimum wage and see how we do?

>Foods more expensive but you can still get a good restaurant cooked meal at 1/2 an hour’s minimum wage.

I'd love to know where I can find a "good restaurant cooked meal" for US$3.63[0].

Would you share even one location where that's possible? I'd eat every single meal there myself!

[0] https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/wages/minimumwage

>So what is this conflict all about?

The evangelical Christians who are among the largest of the Republican Party's voting blocs believe that the biblical "end times" are nigh, but Jesus Christ won't return to bring peace and prosperity until the middle east is destroyed by war[0][2][3] (often called armageddon[1]).

And, as Peter Medawar (quite correctly) observed[4] some years ago:

   The USA is so enormous, and so numerous are its schools, colleges and 
   religious seminaries, many devoted to special religious beliefs ranging from 
   the unorthodox to the dotty, that we can hardly wonder at its yielding a more 
   bounteous harvest of gobbledygook than the rest of the world put together.

I'd suggest drawing your own conclusions (as the above is only part of the story -- fossil fuels, islamophobia and good old-fashioned bigotry fill things out somewhat -- and not the entirety of it) based on the enormous amount of information you can glean from public sources.

[0] https://www.tomorrowsworld.org/booklets/the-middle-east-in-p...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armageddon

[2] https://harvest.org/resources/gregs-blog/post/israel-iran-bi...

[3] https://theconversation.com/as-iran-war-expands-some-conserv...

[4] https://www.azquotes.com/quote/1064507

>How was it foreseeable?

I guess you had to be there. I certainly saw it coming.

>Expert systems worked on quite different principles.

Actually, not so much. The inference engine has changed, but otherwise it's same shit, different day.

>Sci-fi is Lt. Cmdr. Data, HAL, Skynet, Culture Minds...

The current state of things is closer (not close to by a long shot) to Fred Pohl's "AI" programs from his novel Gateway[0] than it is to the above examples.

But even those are decades (at least) beyond what we have now. What we have now is the foreseeable (from at least 30 or 40 years ago) evolution of what was once called "expert systems."[1]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gateway_(novel)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expert_system

>Yeah, seems like either a clickbait title, or maybe they believe their readership is so misinformed as to believe that human evolution could and has stopped. I'd not be surprised if, especially in the US, a large percentage of the public does actually believe this.

When the belief is that of "creationism"[0], it's not so far to go to reject evidence of, well, anything that runs counter to the narrative espoused by a variety of those belief systems. Including the fact of evolution.

I'd point out that those who subscribe to such belief systems are a large fraction of the human population, the largest contingent of which are not resident in the United States, nor are they Americans.

And perhaps those who create such titles are cynically exploiting the gullible. Then again, I'd posit that Hanlon's Razor[1] be assessed in this case. Such an assessment might well uncover cynicism/evil, but probably not -- as those involved may well subscribe to the belief systems referenced above and/or are ignorant/dumb.

All that said, such an idea isn't new. Here's an analog[0] from more than 400 years ago (circa 1600AD):

   What a piece of work is a man, How noble in reason, how infinite in faculty, 
   In form and moving how express and admirable, In action how like an Angel, In 
   apprehension how like a god, The beauty of the world, The paragon of animals
   

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_a_piece_of_work_is_a_man

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor

It appears that whatever issue was impacting Archive.today has been resolved (at least for me).

Thanks for the suggestions. It seems odd that I (presumably via GeoIP location) was continually resolving archive.today sites to non-functional IP addresses, especially since I live in a very densely populated region.

Then again, I'd expect that other than Bender[0] and myself, not very many folks run their own recursive resolvers.

Again, thanks for the suggestions. Although some wild speculation/rumors could have been fun ("archive.today admins abducted by aliens!" or "Malware plot by beer-making Belgian monks takes down parts of archive.today infrastructure." or "Zip bombs make archive.today unresponsive!", etc.)

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49042612

>Who are you using for DNS? If Cloudflare there is a long running squabble between Archive's admins and CF as CF refuses to forward EDNS Client Subnet information and so they return bogus information to Cloudflares servers. Their admin has accounts here but they rarely interact and seem to keep creating new accounts.

DNS resolution is not the issue. Like you, I use my own recursive resolver and the various archive.[today|il|is|ph|etc] sites all resolve without issue, but weirdly MXToolbox[0] resolves those hosts to a different IP address.

I suppose my ISP could be intercepting my recursive queries, but that seems unlikely as I've never detected a dns proxy before.

I'll do some more investigating and, if it is my ISP, I've been looking for a reason to dump them anyway.

[0] https://mxtoolbox.com/DNSLookup.aspx

I'd add that every so often I get a "Welcome to nginx" page instead of just a time out.

Underlying paper from Science[0]

[0] https://www.science.org/content/article/astronomers-spot-fir...

I don't think so.

I prefer the "active" HN page[0] to the front page or page two.

I don't even look at the front page any more. I just look at the active and new pages.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/active

>The article says congress should pass a privacy bill to protect kids.

No. The article says:

   Protect Privacy For *Everyone*

   There is a better way to protect young people online. 
   Instead of encouraging a complicated system of age 
   checks, more monitoring, and more restrictions on access 
   to information, Congress could finally pass a strong, 
   comprehensive privacy law[0] that benefits all users. A 
   great place to start would be to ban behavioral 
   advertising that tracks us across the web—again, for 
   users of all ages.

I'm trying to read your comment in the most charitable way, but it doesn't reflect the article's verbiage or the EFF's position. The best I can come up with is that you badly misunderstood the article and/or the proposed privacy legislation for everyone linked in said article.

Or am I missing something? Do tell.

[0] They even helpfully link to the privacy law they advocate here[1].

[1] https://www.eff.org/wp/privacy-first-better-way-address-onli...