Threads for simba

I’m a bit surprised at all of the people rushing to defend Rick. Should the situation have never gotten that far? Sure. Does that absolve Rick from being very bad at his job? Not at all. Especially if you read some of the followups (e.g. Why Rick couldn’t come back from the brink), he was afforded ample opportunity to not be an asshole martyr.

Are we so attached to the solo hero coder idea that we can’t help but defend it even when it’s as toxic as Rick is?

Code that nobody else can understand is not the mark of a good developer. If people are describing your code as “very clever” then you’ve probably over complicated it.

Real genius is being able to create simple solutions to complex problems.

Depends on what you mean by “mass produced.” If you mean built in high volume at a single factory, then $300 doesn’t sound unreasonable. If you mean produced by every factory that makes keyboards like most commodity keyboards, then <$50 would sound more reasonable.

You can read the blog posts over at http://blog.keyboard.io about producing a mechanical keyboard in China. There’s a huge amount of work in bringing a unique product like that to market. The reason a random keyboard from Fry’s is so cheap is that every company is practically selling the same keyboard with a different brand label on it.

Regarding the comment “it’s not even wireless,” adding a BT IC and antenna to a keyboard hardly has any impact on the per unit cost compared to the mechanicals when you’re building something unique like this.

Keyboards should be moving in the direction of “tactile but silent”.

Not really. Auditory feedback is processed much faster than tactile feedback and this matters when you start typing faster. Cherry MX brown switches are the best combination as far as I’m concerned.

or some HRTF binaural ASMR that emits the typing sound based on posture, limb lengths and key being pressed. But I have a sneaking suspicion that this guy wouldn’t consider it authentic enough. As much as I liked buckling spring, modern day mechanical are tactile enough that the sound pollution tradeoff just isn’t worth it.

You think there is enough demand to justify mass producing this?

I think the only nonsense here is the $50 you just pulled out of thin air.

I guess it does. Even though we have seemingly reached the tipping point, the hard part now is to get the rest on HTTPS. It does help with browsers telling you about it.

Hacked by JUICE.

I think the page may look differently if you’re running content blockers.

There’s nothing wrong with arguing against CAN-SPAM (it has many problems!), but try to resist fabricating a narrative where it only has disadvantages.

Sender pays (even if only cents) is the reason your physical letterbox isn’t buried in a pile of mail. Making law abiding corporations behave themselves and not overload your mail provider is an unambiguous win (they weren’t gonna do it on their own).

There are legitimate uses for bulk marketing email. For example advertising to a targeted email list, services which those people might find useful. This would be a great tool for small businesses, but CAN-SPAM makes it illegal.

Not illegal, if recipients opt in and have the option of unsubscribing. There are many online services who can run the technology for you if implementing unsubscribe yourself is too high a bar to clear.

suddenly saw their methods of ripping off millions of people threatened

I’m with you in the sense that record companies are scummy and have done scummy things too, but “producing and selling music” does not qual “ripping off millions of people”.

Now we see the same thing but it’s governments. They’re just as crooked as the record label executives tho.

The key word here is actually “governments”. The MAFIAA couldn’t have “prevented progress” without the government’s intellectual property enforcement machinery.

No it isn’t, and it is simplistic to think this is the problem being discussed here. Libertarians need to grow up, get off their high horses, and shift their energies into problem solving rather than soap boxing.

If someone breaks into your home and causes you grief then you have an expectation that, as a member of society, you can walk into a police station and call upon its resources. If someone jumps into a car the wrong side of four glasses of wine, whether or not injury or worse is resulting, then society addresses this.

Yet, if the vector of grief delivery is purely computer/Internet in source, then different rules apply? Anyone looking for help is in fact an old man with old ideas and needs to die so society can get back to evolving?

The problem space we are talking about here is that when a crime is in the process of or has been committed, society needs to be able to legally collect evidence.

I’m going to be blunt now.

You, like many others, are unable to separate the problem from the solutions being touted. The situation is not helped when only extreme and fringe examples are used to justify arguments resulting in only nonsense prevailing.

Historically wiretaps have worked well and society is generally is accepting of them. They work as they are handled centrally and are physically secured. For old men, it makes sense to try to transfer these old ideas to new mediums and it is not a dumb idea to try. Of course only an expert though who knows that this is not going to be practical.

Ironclad communications for all does not help society collect evidence. Should a trader who irresponsibly destroyed the Joe Public’s pension be immune from investigation as they used WhatsApp?

We need something, but ironclad communications is not it. Maybe a blend of threshold with some kind of accountable wiretap journal is something more realistic.

Arguing that the bad actors will anyway use ironclad communications is irrelevant in the same way that bad actors illegally obtaining firearms is already addressed. Arguing about government abuse and lack of oversight is another problem but it is not this one and confusing the two just helps no one.

It is always good to apply the Passport to Pimilco test, a movie I recommend everyone watches, also being that it is a classic great fun movie to watch too.

Libertarians need to grow up, get off their high horses, and shift their energies into problem solving rather than soap boxing.

For the record, I’m not a Libertarian as it’s commonly understood. But what exactly are you suggesting they do? What would “problem solving” mean in practice? Are you not “soap boxing”?

you have an expectation that, as a member of society, you can walk into a police station and call upon its resources

Do you also have a reasonable expectation that the police will give a flying fuck and actually do something to achieve justice?

Yet, if the vector of grief delivery is purely computer/Internet in source, then different rules apply?

If you’re referring to “intellectual property theft”, we might agree somewhat. But if you’re arguing in favour of governments circumventing/breaking encryption so that they can catch terrorists, you’re way off the mark there.

It’s not terrorists they’re after.

You, like many others, are unable to separate the problem from the solutions being touted. The situation is not helped when only extreme and fringe examples are used to justify arguments resulting in only nonsense prevailing.

I can’t tell what you mean with that.

Historically wiretaps have worked well

For maintaining a police state? -Why yes, they have.

and society is generally is accepting of them

You seem to be unable to separate “society” into rulers and subjects. People often talk about how “we” need to this and we need to that, but it’s not actually we that make the decisions. In case you haven’t noticed, whenever we demand something, we’re met with tear gas and batons.

Ironclad communications for all does not help society collect evidence.

There’s “society” again. Is it “society” that collects evidence? Is it “society” that wiretaps dissidents and “disappears” them?

Should a trader who irresponsibly destroyed the Joe Public’s pension be immune from investigation as they used WhatsApp?

Are there other ways the crime could be investigated, besides reading his encrypted private communications?

If someone breaks into your home and causes you grief then you have an expectation that, as a member of society, you can walk into a police station and call upon its resources. … Yet, if the vector of grief delivery is purely computer/Internet in source, then different rules apply?

To use the model you’re advancing here, it would be as though the government wanted to address home break ins by installing centrally monitored cameras in all homes. Due to the nature of crypto, the exegeses are different, so different things are needed or must be considered. Your equivalence is false.

Historically wiretaps have worked well and society is generally is accepting of them. They work as they are handled centrally and are physically secured.

Yup. Historically they worked very very well. . However, events since then tend to have obscured one’s memory of the earlier events.

I often wonder about the ways in which the two events might be related.

I’m sure the average man in the street feels things are working well.