Delicious was the only useful bookmark manager ever. Nothing ever came close to replacing it. Though for me the “social” part was pretty useless (plenty of actual link aggregators out there to discover content at the time)
…god remember the “tags” phase of content organization?
Delicious was cool because of the constant streaming of links and things that I was able to discover back then. I would sit there and just click on links, finding good content
For me it was always: Google, YouTube, Reddit and forums. There are also niche sites that cater to certain groups and interests like Steam and Twitch for gaming or IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes for movies. There is no universal content discovery platform or engine(besides maybe Google).
Flickr incentivized uploading a lot of photos with metadata and was highly searchable. It was great for photo hobbyists building a personal archive for others to peruse.
Instagram was for smartphone photos and playing with filters to set a vibe, and ephemeral sharing with friends and people you wanted to impress. It’s hardly searchable at all.
It sounds like an Instagram style app, with Flickr as the backend would be ideal. People could still share for fun from their phones, while actually being able to find and organize old photos, if they wish.
The new construction projects are sad as evidenced by the horrendous Osaka train station. What a waste of space and concrete.
If Japan insists on these projects, they should look at Sanatana Row in San Jose or the Assembly in Somerville. Offer assistance and transition help to existing small businesses. (What supermarket is planned? Don-Qui?)
Enlighten me as to what's wrong with the Osaka train station? Conceivably I would imagine that it's built with a bit of a buffer to handle the demand that such an infrastructure project could eventually service. What do you think they did wrong?
AFAICT, Germans & Brits outnumber Americans in Paris and Chinese outnumber Americans in Tokyo. So American numbers aren't particularly significant, IMO.
But seanmcdirmid in a sibling comment is likely correct, and I'm possibly wrong.
Hmm. As a Brit I would not consider a trip to Paris to be "tourism". It's just a trip over the border. Yes they speak a different language there but it's a language that I was forced to study in school. No doubt Germans feel the same way.
Going to Spain on the other hand would be tourism. I don't speak Spanish, it's not a neighbouring country, you arrive in an airport, etc.
If an American or a Chinese person goes to Paris I feel they likely have different motivations and itinerary than a Brit, Belgian, etc who is taking the train possibly only for the day.
I was reading Hyatt's Privacy Policy and they mention biometrics (and even genetic information for some reason). Does this mean they can analyze all of my behavior in the hotel room?
I'm not about to find out. I really liked Hyatt, too.
Probably, but my care would have suffered. They are required by law to treat people in emergencies but they aren’t required by law to do anything but keep them from immediately dying.
I have a condition that requires complex and ongoing care, and sometimes need to be admitted briefly for same. Refusing to sign consent forms prevents that and gets you on to the “this guy isn’t going to pay us, get him out of here asap” list.
Yeah, I get how that could be. I wondered if that was something you'd feel comfortable doing in that specific ER, and I could imagine feeling like you had to choose between skipping the form and getting care.
The rust binary is great, but the underlying zk technology itself desperately needs to be sold to those dealing with things like passports.
In fact, now that I think about it, zk-proof identity will be required in the near future since so many poorly run organizations are leaking ID documents.
First, in the US this type of thing violates the fourth amendment as the Institute for Justice will prove in court with ALPRs. It could be set up such that it does not, but for whatever reason these companies are greedy and make it broad rather than narrow in scope.
Second, I just won't patronize your establishment, shopping center, or municipality if you do. I'd like to go to the UK, but because of this policy I will not. Menlo Park pushed back against ALPRs: I'll go there. I went to a different ski shop because the one closest to me has an ALPR. And so on.
So, this may be different in the UK, but in the US a large majority of travel occurs in private cars, so omnipresence of ALPRs is close to collecting data on everybody and knowing what everybody is doing at all times.
One might assume from a game-theoretical perspective that this is no different from living in a village where essentially everyone knows everyone’s business, and the knowledge that that knowledge is mutual prevents people from acting badly with the information that they have. However, in the situation where a small minority of people have knowledge about everyone else, and not vice versa, this can give that minority unearned power over everyone else.
In practice, it doesn’t feel great. I hope this answered your question.
1. Data is retained by a handful of companies. If it is leaked, you'll have a lot of information on people that is suddenly fair game for anyone including insurance companies, PI, home invaders.
2. In the US, I'm not concerned about local government as much as federal when it comes to the fourth amendment. Suppose you have a rogue potus. He sends the national guard in to Atlanta, Chicago, and Downingtown to take over the systems of these companies. Now you say, "well I'll just remove my license plate!" But these companies are cataloguing make, model, color, bumper stickers, dents; so you can take off your plate in a situation like that but they are going to still be able to track you with a high degree of certainty. People were shocked by South Korea declaring martial law -- we've become so spoiled taking these essential laws for granted. (Sorry I don't know enough about British law.)
If they don't send all license plate data to the internet there isn't an issue. But they do.
I think it’s reasonable to refer to a query of a database as a “search” as in “searches and seizures”. In that context, the gathering of data should be okay if a given search of the data requires a warrant. Unfortunately, warrants are only required for ”seizing” the data, not “searching” what has already been seized. Given that, it is reasonable to refer to the collection of data as a privacy violation especially given the breadth and scale of such a collection.
The agreeable arguments I hear tend to make the case that the scale is the problem. There’s a huge qualitative difference between having a human officer tail a human suspect to track the latter’s movements in public because that person is suspected of having committed a crime versus tailing via automated machines everyone in the vicinity at all times for no reason other than “nobody said we can’t”.
> for no reason other than “nobody said we can’t”.
This is exactly the nature of law though. Everything is allowed unless prohibited. Do you believe you have an expectation of privacy in the public sphere? If not, how could you disagree with the legality of the collection and review of activities performed in public?
I don't want a total surveillance state either but I can't see a basis for disallowing recording in public standing on the 4th amendment for support.
So do you think it's okay to record someone else's kids in bathing suits at a lake for watching later?
Just trying to connect panoptic recording to something that tends to motivate visceral reactions from people.
Not everything needs to be recorded. In point of fact, I see more than enough room for a right to non-overt recall-ability being worth at least discussing if only because we have evolved our capabilities to pervasively monitor to such a scale that it is nigh-required we sit down and really discuss this. There'll be no more familiar a generation than ours for coming to terms with these technologies if only because we brought them this far. It's our responsibility to contain their excess.
> So do you think it's okay to record someone else's kids in bathing suits at a lake for watching later?
I may not like it, but it's their right. Just like I can't control their minds to not think about someone else's kids when they are alone with themselves. Same with speech I don't like.
You'd need to look at it from the lens of whether it constitutes a search.
IJ is the real deal. Check out their dossier of Supreme Court wins. It will be interesting to see what the eventual Supreme Court arguments and opinions are.
In that instance they had a one way entrance and exit, so I drove out the entrance. My policy now is to drive through an ALPR, mark it on OsmAnd, then go a different route.
Google street view is helpful, though these things are going up at an alarming rate. There's also a website that has a list, though it isn't maintained (e.g. there are hundreds of these near me but none are on that website).
When OpenAI was rumored to acquire Windsurf last week I went to their site and switched languages. When I tried to switch back it got into a weird state and didn't display the original language. Not sure what to think of that other than vibe coding may need a little more oversight. (Who is working on AI QA? Winning pickaxe and shovel business right there.)
>> They should report it to the New York Attorney General's office, especially with damning evidence like the insurance company being refused contact.
Does this work outside high-profile cases? A condo I lived in faced dozens of serious offenses from the builder (e.g., live electrical wires left dangling open in living areas during a construction dispute.) The lawyers filed complaints with the NY AG but were told it mostly adds to some aggregate and real action is taken when the aggregate is huge. Also, we were told that most AG attention is focused on Manhattan and not the outer-boroughs.
If they have clear evidence with contract, email with company, email with insurance, then it may be worth it to try submitting the evidence to the AG. The AG may write a letter and the company may ignore it, but if other people are in the same situation and the AG's office hears about it they may take more serious action.
Was the builder in the middle of renovating and there was some contract dispute? Legal issues are always nuanced and construction can easily have misunderstandings. With builders I'd have either a good construction attorney draft a contract or just hire a reputable builder. (Matt Risinger, for example, won't deal with custom legal contracts, so you generally will have to choose one or the other. I'd go with a reputable builder and one that doesn't want to tarnish that reputation.)
In our case it was a builder who had done dozens of Brooklyn high-rise apartments. Seems they were facing similar complaints from multiple buildings on corners cut during initial construction (e.g., live wires dangling in apartments, loose tiles on balconies which could fall off the highrise, work which would not meet threshold for the city to issue a non-temporary Certificate of Occupancy.) The condo association had to retain a lawyer, spent high five figures on a lawsuit, settled, but got no help from the NY AG.
Tumblr, del.icio.us, ROI. Probably all should have continued growing and becoming established properties.
reply