Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | eckmLJE's commentslogin

I appreciate what you've posted here. Valve fanboyism is widespread (I'm guilty of it too) and while they are shoulders above the alternatives, it's a good reminder that no one's perfect and I'll be sure to take a closer look at the company in the future.


That's all I was saying. Valve is way ahead of most of the rest of everyone else. But they are still shady.

We should be ok with pointing at the shady parts of things we like and going, "It would be better if it were not so shady."

Valve is good in many ways! Valve would be better if it didn't profit from getting kids to gamble on skins!


"The enemy's gate is down"!


I kept hoping they'd provide a reference of Tenochtitlan. Possibly the most striking thing I learned when visiting Mexico City.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenochtitlan


they did!

>Mexico City was built on top of what used to be a large body of water, which would make its water shortage appear ironic if it wasn’t so tragic. In the early 1300s, the Mexica (or Aztecs) settled on an island in the middle of what used to be a huge lake called Texcoco, the largest among five intertwined lakes.

But after the arrival of the Spaniards, the city started to expand, and the urban sprawl caused the lake system to dry up. By the early 20th century, the rivers feeding the once-rich lake zone were put into pipelines to make way for motor vehicles. Very little is left of the lakes, while the rivers have become practically invisible.


Thank you! I scanned the text and scrolled through all the pics, and searched for `tenoch` and didn't get any hits. "The urban sprawl caused the lake system to dry up" glosses over a super interesting sequence of decisions that led to the disaster.

More reading for anyone interested

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Mexico_City#Floodin... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Texcoco#Artificial_draina... https://blogs.loc.gov/law/2022/09/mexico-citys-desage-of-160...


good read, thanks for sharing!


To hedge against increasing electric utility prices, maybe. I installed solar recently and the cost of batteries to cover a decent power outage didn’t make sense to me. I just got a transfer switch and a portable propane generator instead. The battery tech / price is just not there yet IMO. And in case this isn’t well known, when there is a power outage and you don’t have battery backup, the solar generation shuts off — you’re not using solar AS the backup in most cases unless you have a very particular setup.


> the cost of batteries to cover a decent power outage didn’t make sense to me.

Are you trying to power your whole house during a power outage, or just a few necessities like a space heater, a few lamps, and maybe a hotplate?


Silk road had a policy against selling items with intent to harm like guns. While occasionally some weapon listings would slip through, they would be taken down. The focus was drugs (and a lot of legal media). There were plenty of other black market sites on the dark web that sold everything, but that's not what the silk road in particular was about.


No, silk road did not sell weapons. There was legal content like pornography and other media on there, but Ulbricht was an idealist and excluded material with "intent to harm".


Notably, as Ullbricht predicted, the Silk Road was immediately replaced by sites which did not have such ideals, and openly sold weapons and illegal pornography.


They were there already and shutting down the silk road changed nothing in that perspective.


So all the people who got convicted for selling firearms on Silk Road, how'd that happen then?


don't conflate Silk Road == all Darknet Markets

plus in North America you don't really need a darknet market to get a gun illegally. US FedGov ain't gonna get to involved in illegal gun sales in Europe.


It didn't happen.

Ctrl-F for "Products" on this page[1] and stop making shit up.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Road_(marketplace)


Interesting and surprising they really had rules, thanks for the clarification. I'm ashamed to say I opened this page and read it wrong the first time by skipping the first sentence.


You might be interested in my comment about Carnegie Mellon University's researchers findings on what Silk Road sold/didn't sell/what was popular.


Web accessibility describes specific requirements for people with disabilities to be able to use your website. If you don't implement these features, blind people, colorblind people, people who can't use a mouse, etc., won't be able to use your website. You can make a strategic choice not to support these users for reasons like ROI. But obviously there are plenty of situations where either we make the affirmative choice not to exclude people with disabilities, or we're required by law to accommodate them. In my personal opinion, we should always build on the web with the modern features that support assistive technologies, and that building inaccessible web experiences is synonymous with building poor quality web experiences. Many of the (mostly native) features that enable an experience accessible to people with disabilities improve the experience for all users.


>we should always build on the web with the modern features that support assistive technologies

Or build on the old web without modern features, that supports assistive technologies by default [1] :).

[1] https://motherfuckingwebsite.com/


> we need to assume that the survey was done of reviews.org visitors.

That's pretty unlikely. Reviews.org likely engages one of many vendors (like Qualtrics[1]) that will solicit responses online for a survey you design and provide to them through their survey building tool.

[1] https://www.qualtrics.com/research-services/online-sample/


I've read dozens of these survey methodologies, and the reputable ones always tell you who they recruited to do the survey and what sampling method was used (if only in broad strokes). Given that this one does neither, we have to assume the laziest approach possible.

If they wanted us to take their survey seriously they'd have a real methodology section.


Sure, they could be lazy in a lot of ways in how they execute this survey leading to unreliable results -- indeed, fielding it through something like qualtrics could be said to be "lazier" than attempting to solicit and engage readers of your own individual site. It would be pretty hard and expensive to get enough responses yourself for even a lazy, low-quality result, vs. the at-scale offerings of a vendor.


Vacancy is for rentals. If you own a condo and leave it empty / don’t live in it, that doesn’t show up in a vacancy rate.


Are you referring to someone declaring a condo as their primary residence and not using it as such? Or are you saying that all condos do not count towards the vacancy rate?

If there is lots of evidence for the former; it should be shown.


I disagree. There are plenty of folks who would rather see the natural world preserved for its own sake, even at the expense of human growth and survival. And plenty of folks dismissing environmentalists as treehuggers who love nature more than humanity, who don't get that preserving the natural world is a prerequisite to human survival. I think the distinction is important.


> There are plenty of folks who would rather see the natural world preserved for its own sake, even at the expense of human growth and survival.

Because of what...geology? The Earth itself? (No.)

You might have missed the “and/or animals” part. My comment already addresses those who are more concerned (as in preoccupied) with non-human life.

But I guess I should have mentioned plants as well. Mea fucking culpa.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: