Author makes a point badly, but there is an important point here.

It's really strange that we de-facto allow the few large credit card networks (Visa, Mastercard) to effectively impose their own particular views and values on what sorts of businesses can process payments. The stigma+roadblocks against these "high-risk categories" generally doesn't come from the processors (like Stripe, Adyen), but are actually driven by the networks themselves, in response to lobbying by groups such as Collective Shout. https://nabesaka.com/visa-mastercard-deciding-content-legali...

Whatever you think about NSFW media or gambling in particular, you _should_ worry that Visa and/or Mastercard could decide tomorrow that they don't want to process payments for you and cause you to lose your livelihood.

It's not that credit card companies have some kind of moral bone to pick, it is that the legal, logistical and political morass of dealing with the variety of state and national laws, definitions of porn, protections of children and non-consenting performers, etc. are such that it is not worth it for them to pursue.

Similar issues exist for, e.g., companies and sites selling legal THC and THC products.

That might be part of it, but I don't think it's the only or primary motivation. But we don't really get to know.

They can and have used this power to effectively censor legal content. I don't think this sort of power is something that a private entity should hold. Being able to refuse service is fine for a random restaurant when there's 10 other options available, much less so for a duopoly that provides a key facet of modern life.

exactly, they would not give two shits about what your business does if they got immunity from any prosecution

They are categorically different.

I can implement a dependency cooldown for my org and benefit from it immediately. An upload queue gets its value from being done centrally and allowing security researchers early access and the ability to coordinate.

This article is a category error.

Dependency cooldowns are how you can improve your security on an individual level. Using them does not make you a free rider any more than using Debian instead of Ubuntu instead of Arch does. Different people/companies/machines have different levels of acceptable risk - cooldowns let you tune that to your use case. Using open source software does not come with a contract or responsibility for free, implicit pentesting.

Upload queues are how a package manager/registry can collectively improve security for it's users. I cannot implement an upload queue for just me - the value comes from it being done in a centralized way.

I'm in favor of both, though hopefully with upload queues the broader practice of long dependency cooldowns would become more limited to security-focused applications.

"Really smart" and "elon" are not two words I'd put together in the same sentence.

Reminder this is the same man that paid someone else to play on his video game account for him so he could pretend to be better at video games.

I don't actually believe this, but am picking an argument that I expect deadeye an Elon apologist to believe. If you don't think he's smart I don't need to convince you?

You don't have to rewrite the source branch to squash merge?

I wouldn't describe it as "cleaning up the history". And the goal isn't to save space, it's to keep a linear history where things ought to be working at each commit (to enable tools like git bisect and similar).

I personally don't ensure everything is working every time I commit - That's what CI is for. The exact process I work through while writing a PR shouldn't impact other people's workflows, so when I merge back into a central branch it should really only reveal the granularity at which I assert 'this code is working and good', which is NOT every intermediate commit I make. Squash merge is a way to do that that fits nicely with existing engineering workflows, like code review.

With the writing being at the level that it is, I struggle to take the claim "I was telling him, sir, give me one actual rule im breaking and i'll take the site down" Seriously. OP obviously didn't clearly understand why people were having a negative reaction to the site; I expect they might not recognize rules or laws even if they were cited.

I am actually pretty surprised how bad the writing is in the article. As far as I know, IIT is one of the most prestigious universities in India.

Also his general reactions and overall maturity seem very poorly developed. I might expect that response from a thirteen year old, but a university student?

Really sounds like an arrogant rich kid who has had a lifetime of getting whatever he wants.

I do get whatever i want in life. But thats not cos im a rich kid (im not), its cos i work really hard and have conviction. And i will continue getting everything i want in life for the same reason. Try it out

You might be confusing "conviction" with sociopathy

How is the writing bad

> this is that story.

This sentence is missing capitalization.

> For egs

Egs is not a word. I assume you mean example? Or if you want to abbreviate it, use "e.g.".

> Back to the story, at 1 am, I launched the site, and just told 4 of my friends. that's it.

That's not how you're supposed to use commas. First one should probably be a period or semicolon. Second one is unnecessary. Third one is defensible, but you're connecting two independent clauses; I think it's better as two sentences. Failing that it's better without the comma.

> lmao as you can see

I wouldn't include "lmao" in any serious piece of writing attached to my professional identity.

> I told them, "no i wont",

This is missing an apostrophe and capitalization.

The list goes on, and on, and on, and on.

Stylistic concerns aside, this reads like you're telling a story to a friend. It's very 'stream of thought'. You don't give much commentary. You don't reflect on what you or others did right or wrong. You don't seem to have actually learned anything from this experience. Better writing would include reflection and show that you have put some actual thought into this incident beyond knee-jerking 'I did nothing wrong I shouldn't have been punished this isn't fair'.

Lmao i obv knew why some ppl were having a negative reaction, like i dont agree with them but i get it. What i didnt get is why is it an acceptable reason to make me take dow my site? Thousands of ppl were enjoying it too, js cos 3 kids dont like it, no reason to shut it down. I can find 100 people right now who wont like facebook, or hacker news, or even charities for that matter, should we shut them all down. And lmao who even gives you the right to talk about shutting things down tf

I wasn't making a point about whether it should actually be shut down or not (and in fact I don't have much of an opinion on that, I don't know the laws in India). Instead, I was making the point that your low quality writing likely reflects a weakness in incoming communication.

And now ironically, you responding in this way, missing my key point, and trying to argue something else actually reinforces it.

solved first try with 577 actions, not trying hard to optimize for low action count.

I think that is the tester's action count. Either that or we coincidentally got the exact same count.

I also see 577, so must be human testers action count. Also watched the replay, the solve seems different to mine.

It's not about doesn't - the government can always claim that it doesn't track you. That is unlikely to stay true.

It's really either they can't track you or they will track you.

Did you give claude access to run the compile step?

I remember having to write code on paper for my CS exams, and they expected it to compile! It was hard but I mostly got there. definitely made a few small mistakes though

Yes.

Would software be more or less free in a world without copyright?

I argue more free. EULAs and restrictions on how+for what software can be used, like DRM, typically use copyright as their legal backing. GPL licenses turn that on it's head but that doesn't redeem the original, flawed, law.

This seems to follow the letter but not the spirit of the license. If this does pass legal muster, we can do the same to whatever proprietary software we wish, which makes a dramatically different but IMO better ecosystem in the end.

It will be disproportionately hard to do it to proprietary software though. The imbalance of power is sort of what the GPL was there for