𝙲𝚑𝚊𝚒𝚛𝚖𝚊𝚗 𝙼𝚎𝚘𝚠 @ ChairmanMeow @programming.dev

Posts

0

Comments

948

Joined

2 yr. ago

Admins and mods have other tools to deal with those issues. But given that Reddit is a corporation it will likely also remove content that are in a murky area rules-wise, or given the current political climate selectively apply the rules. That creates a risk for redditors who try to use the site legitimately as well.

Mostly the photography market as far as I know, those raw images take up a lot of space.

What Reddit believes to be "bad content" has historically been a little dubious. So I can understand people are apprehensive about this.

Pretty sure the reasoning behind that was given in book 1.

I see people enter with left signal flashing and then they'll take the 3rd exit (out of 4 total).

Pretty sure that's how you're supposed to signal. In most places it's not a legal requirement but it is recommended and taught by most driving instructors.

Although I do assume they switch to their right signal before taking their exit. If they don't, then yeah that's wrong.

That's merely one interpretation of quantum mechanics. There are others that don't conclude this (though they come with their own caveats, which haven't been disproven but they seem unpalatable to most physicists).

Still, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle does claim that even if the universe is predictable, it's essentially impossible to gather the information to actually predict it.

Yeah Merz seems reasonable geopolitically speaking, and seems willing to make the hard choices. I'm not terribly sad about Scholz losing to him, especially as another GroKo is most likely to happen.

There's a reason that the word "sinister" has negative connotations these days, despite it originating from the latin word for "left".

It's not a fact.

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abk0639

Dog breeds are an incredibly poor predictor of behaviour. Behaviour is heritable to some degree, but the breed itself doesn't really determine it.

Kilo is metric for 1000, not 1024. To remain consistent it was changed.

Wdym "soon". They've been visible for a while now.

Tuta would also be required to implement a backdoor in their encryption if this law passes. In this post they've stated they will refuse to do so, because it's not possible.

Misspelled "Invidious" there :)

Looks neat though!

I think most people's alternative to a touchsceen is a mouse, not the touchpad.

There is of course wiggle room in the NATO clause, but there's less of it. Additionally, the fact that the collective decides if military action is needed then individual members don't get an opt-out of that.

Of course, ultimately nothing is ironclad, but given the established precedent for A5 and the excessive amount of individual wiggle room in A42, as far as I know A5 is considered to be more likely to be successfully invoked than A42 is.

I think it's generally agreed upon that Art. 42 (7) of the EU-Treaty is stronger than Art. 5.

That's absolutely not the consensus. This is what the EU themselves say about article 42:

Substantial uncertainty remains over the interpretation of Article 42(7). Following its first and only invocation in 2015, after the November terrorist attacks in Paris, debate intensified on how it works in practice, its scope, the definitions of 'armed aggression' and 'territory', and which forms of aggression it applies to (e.g. whether those include hybrid threats). Experts note that Article 42(7) 'leaves more room for interpretation than one might expect from a clause in a legally binding text'. Many experts hoped that the Strategic Compass would deliver clarification, however that did not occur.

The problem is that through precedent we know that A5 invocations can (and almost certainly will) trigger military aid. With A42, you at best get "aid and assistance", which the EU notes is super vague. The "by all means in their power" is also very vague legally speaking. Suppose Russia invades Estonia, and Latvia says "intervening militarily would invite a Russian invasion of Latvia, so intervening is outside of our power". This consistent vagueness at every level of A42 makes it so it's generally assumed that A42 could very well be weaker than A5, even if the wording appears stronger. It's a political choice how to interpret A42, but with A5 the scopes are defined a bit more clearly, and there's far less wiggle room due to the collective action, rather than the individual actions EU member states would take.

The EU defense clause gets triggered, which is basically a weak obligation to provide "assistance". It's not an automatic call to arms like NATO's A5.

20% AfD is bad ofc, but also still puts them nowhere near power, even if the media hypes them up for clicks.

I think the biggest issue is that if you already need to separate payments, returns, shipping, etc... you're left with a shop that also advertises products for other shops, possibly competitors. Then the question becomes... why bother federating at all?

I think it'd be better to set up a FOSS shopping platform, eg something that competes with WooCommerce or the likes. That's significantly easier from a financial and legal perspective, and I think it's an easier sell to actual merchants (why pay a license for that shit, use this one for freeee). Then once you have that running, you could think about optional federation as an addition to an already well-functioning platform.

I work in the IT department for a fairly large payment service provider. I can tell you now that you seem to be vastly underestimating both the financial aspect of this as well as several legal aspects.

• Federation would almost certainly have to be opt-in rather than opt-out. I don't think you're going to pass KYC checks for any PSP if it's opt-out, the risk of someone (ever so briefly) selling illegal goods through your website is too great otherwise. Stripe would just shut down your account (if they even let you open it), PayPal probably won't let you open it at all.
• Selling goods from other sites through your own, makes you liable for any returns, warranty claims etc... Simply "passing these on" isn't going to cut it. If the other site disagrees with the customer claim, you are on the hook for it, because it was sold through your website.
• The financial logistics aspect here is really complex. If you're going to process payments on behalf of another site, you have to deal with reconciliation. After reconciliation you have to the send the money to the other shop, incurring additional (sometimes surprisingly sizeable) fees. And coming from someone who deals with (automated) reconciliation on a daily basis, every payment method does it differently and they all find extremely creative ways to mess up your systems. And that includes unannounced changes, mistakes, random unexplained fees, failure to deliver settlement files, etc...
• How do you deal with the risk of scam instances? E.g. instance A tells instance B that a product was sold and the payment was processed. B sends it out, but it turns out the customer was the owner of A, and there was no payment at all. B just lost a product with very little chance of getting it back.
• Then there's practical aspects. How do you deduplicate products in search? Or will you have dozens of listings for the exact same product?

The only remotely viable way I see this working is if only search is actually federated. Once you are on a product page, you can only pay using the payment page of the instance that has the product. You won't be able to pay for products of multiple instances at once, and you might lose some unified styling. But at least that approach has a chance of passing KYC and deals with all the legal issues regarding returns/warranties etc..., and it reduces the scam risk because you're in charge of your own payments. But at that point, you've only federated product search and nothing else, and then as a consumer you might as well just Google it instead.

I appreciate you have experience in running a business, but running a marketplace, especially a very complicated one, is really not like running a usual business.