lbruno's comments

this reminds me of kenton v's complaint about working on infra being so hard

TC diffs of 230k vs 350k is what i've seen, for a mid-career SRE

full-timers or contacting?

it's an adverts company, when i looked in the past 80% of the revenue came from the ads unit

there's a reason i explicitly chose the example of that threat phoned in re: Belfast

if you think USA-style free-speech ideas will somehow shield you if you engage in that sort of behaviour, or if you frequent the online spaces where that sort of behaviour is coordinated

you should go and have another think

besides, the eejit briefly hosted from a Netherlands DC so good luck with that whole approach ;)

i know you didn't, but you were speaking generically and about abstract principles/guidelines/etc

i usually caution folks to speak of concrete things, so that you're not led astray and forget what you're defending

thanks for this

i have moaned very hard re: the flat / glassy UIs of today, and i deeply loathe how newer folks have no respect for maintaining a working tab-order

good grief, losing the reliability of pressing tab and focus going to where i wanted it? really got me

lol, speech isn't an absolute right where i grew up, thankfully

i'm European, you're arguing as if i had to meekly accept your framing that impeding someone from speaking is a bad thing

who is speaking and what they're saying is crucial to that assessment, hence you get to justify e.g. the threats KF orchestrated in Belfast if you want to justify keeping KF on the air

even with me saying “being censured”, folks pretend there's some censorship concern here

there's isn't

“censorship” is when an advocate of human-rights gets silenced by a powerful entity that wishes to revoke said human rights

“being censured” is me getting moderated for insulting the intelligence of right-wingers here, if that goes against the rules

i never said/implied anything generic re: private ISPs serving KF

what i implied was specific and concrete: KF should not be served by anyone

you're the one marketing a generic and abstract “no duty to serve”, because you can't defend the specific and concrete actions taken by KF

edit: i'll also happily make the concrete argument that cake shops shouldn't be allowed to discriminate against gays/lesbians/etc, while at the same time saying no-one should be allowed to serve KF

these two points of view are perfectly consistent with one another -- confusion only arises if you try to think of abstract nonsense that must apply to both situations

that is a strawman of your own creation

it's the other way around, you can discriminate against arseholes

there's specific prohibitions against discrimination on the basis of certain categories

i'm European, but i am familiar with the work of the ACLU at Skokie, including that detail

keywords: i'm European

meaning your appeal to an absolute right to freely speech washes right off

it's on you to defend the harassment incited and guided by KF

that includes, i'll remind you, a juvenile attempt at calling in a threat in Belfast; didn't work, they didn't know the old code-words

one example of what you'll need to defend; or you can stop digging

i'm enjoying the right-leaning comments here -- it's not censorship, it's being censured

which highlights a point i like to make: if you wish to defend KF, first you have to justify the concrete speech being carried out on it

with examples

which you can't post here because it goes against the rules of this place -- which should be a pretty big hint as to why the fruit site got censured