If you have been in Israel you know that Tel Aviv is as much a warzone as NYC, and much less than Paris.
Though, something has to be added for context: 95% of people in Israel walking around with weapons are soldiers. So of course you feel safer than next to a random hillbilly. This is not relevant to discussion about the 2nd amendment.
>If you have been in Israel you know that Tel Aviv is as much a warzone as NYC, and much less than Paris
How so? Is the whole of Israel Tel Aviv? Is there not daily violence in Israel? Is there not a whole nation locked in a ghetto inside its borders? Is that not Israel? Only Tel Aviv is Israel?
Great that you feel so safe near Israeli soldiers, I myself will never set foot in the country.
It's insanely easy for a program to recognize individual digits and then type them out. Saying a name would also be trivial (recorded, generated, etc). Audio captchas have existed for a while, they have been an alternative for a long time, and they are even more annoying than images.
What we need is an abuse prevention system involving authentication. You can get reported for robo calls, and if enough different accounts you called have reported you, you get reviewed/banned/throttled. Let's not reinvent the wheel, it's been the standard way to deal with spam all over the web. But it requires rethinking the way we use phones, and a whole new infrastructure. It also brings some anonymity concerns but half-measures are just an arms race.
I think you are right about this. The previous response said they received 10 spam calls for every 1 real one. I'm probably about the same. My email spam isn't even close to that. 50 to 1, inbox, maybe?
This situation is far more dire for the telco's and their debt holders than they are catching on to. The telephone number, portable or not, is what anchors their customers. When it is gone, you've got a commodity.
That's why it's a monopoly. The region can tell companies "who can make these lines (some profitable, some less) for the lowest subsidies, while fulfilling these other requirements?" Then the private companies compete, one wins and has to serve cake routes as well as empty ones, because the contract with the region makes them do it.
Everyone wants your region? Great, you can lower the subsidies, or even tax the company. No one wants it? Ask for more money from the state, or consider eliminating some useless routes.
Then the monopoly part makes it easy to calculate the profitability of the package and get concrete offers.
But you could then just go, give the same plan to different competing teams in the public railway network and you will get a similar effect. Because over all the private companies will also have to carry the cost of a lost competition to their customers.
I just don’t think it is good to give public infrastructure into the hands of any entity that has to generate profit. It is not a good idea for trains (look at the German Bahn where it now turns out they neglected infrastructure for years just to look profitable), it is not a good idea for water and not for cellular networks or internet (the German market is again a good example).
If you have a monopolist it will also leverage the fact that they are the only one. They essentially will blackmail you by strategic problems that will fall back onto you as the responsible governing body. They will put lobbyists into every possible spot and suddenly you live in a world where the only people who understand railways are on the monopolists payroll and a politician should decide about a topic they have no idea about.
And if put up too high requirements, everybody loses. In Germany the frequencies for 3G were auctioned for way to much money. How did the mobile networks compensate that loss? By essentially halting any infrastructure investment and changing the requirement from “has to reach 99% of the area” to “has to reach 99% of the households”.
The effects: broken train infrastructure with 1 in 5 trains arriving late, the worst mobile network of Europe, the slowest internet of Europe.
I am convinced a public train, mobile and internet infrastructure would be expensive — but I might get reception 10km outside of Berlin — I might be able to catch that next train and I might be able to get fibre in the middle of the German capital.
Alternative, the private companies spend their resources lobbying politicians to remove the unprofitable requirements, something that is relatively easier than making them profitable, and the whole system collapses.
Could something like Android webview work? The webview doesn't force each app to include a whole browser. So, maybe single instance of electron runtime with multiple thin apps with "electron-webviews".
You'd still have to bundle a JS engine. Presumably you could build a traditional UI app and include V8, but I still think this isn't a bad use case for Electron (but I agree there are many apps where it isn't the best choice)
I'd imagine that the browser is the resource-heavy part of the application, Nodejs doesn't use hundreds of mb's of RAM in my experience, at least not while doing very little background work.
To me it would make sense to build a real desktop application and bundle whatever JS engine you want to use, pipe and process the output as any other application.
You'd end up with a much smaller application (Download size), more resource-efficient, and less reliance on things like the bundled browser.
> You'd end up with a much smaller application (Download size), more resource-efficient, and less reliance on things like the bundled browser.
None of these things I care about. I care about whether or not it serves a purpose to me. If it does, I'll use it. If it doesn't, I won't. You might have other priorities and that's your prerogative.
Solar and nuclear could serve to recharge car batteries so it's not completely inaccurate. As for the battery capacity problem, the combination of more recharge stations (say, next to the workplace) and more efficient car sharing/renting when you actually need to go far can solve that. So it's also a logistics problem.
Exactly. As a Java dev, I can't imagine creating a dependency for such a tiny thing. I would want a reputable library. My dependency tree can grow pretty big but not nearly as much as my typical node_modules.
The thing with Java, and most other popular languages, is that packaging up a unit that small is painful enough that you don't want to do it.
For instance, if I was going to do something similar to left-pad in a .NET way, I'd have to create a whole Visual Studio project and build a DLL for a single function, which would rightly be recognized as pants-on-head.
I'm not sure why you need that trait in software. You're (usually) not trying to beat other programmers. So I suppose the parent comment should have added "except in adversarial situations".
Which means it does apply to cyber security. You need hackers to outsmart hackers. If that's the kind of industry you're applying for, it probably is a good idea to mention this actually.
Same here. It's the only thing that looked close enough like an open and secure platform, very much unlike LastPass and 1Password, which I can't believe so many tech-savvy people keep trusting.
KeePass would be perfect if I had an easy platform to share the file on. A VPS isn't reliable enough for me, and Dropbox 's proprietary Linux client did suspicious stuff.
