I think iMessage is a great example of “Embrace, Extend”. Apple didn’t build a standalone chat app because everyone (in the US) was already using SMS on their phones and “hey if you happen to be SMSing another iPhone user you get these extra features”
It generally doesn't cost e.g. the printer manufacturer anything when you use a 3rd party cartidge. This is separate from the value/loss described above. I still think once you reach a certain size there need to be some interop requirements though but I can also see why many would say these points are unrelated to iMessage.
I feel like “email is dead as a decentralized protocol” is paradoxically a meme among Gmail users. Counter-anecdote: I haven’t touched Gmail in years and I still send and receive email fine
Yup, I too receive spam just fine. Greylisting and SPF alone doesn't stop it now. If I want to send e-mail to someone on gmail or office365 it usually ends up in spam.
In a regular economy, every exchange is a two-way transaction. I give you something, you give me something (usually of perceived equal value).
In a gift economy. I gift you something. You gift someone something. That someone could be me, but if I don't need/want anything you need, then you just gift to someone else. If there are gifts going around all the time, all in good faith, then most people will receive what they need.
You see gift economies in families or friends all the time. People help others according to their abilities. My rich friend takes me out to an expensive dinner, poor me gets us lunch from that famous food truck. I nurse my uncle when he breaks his leg. He lets my brother's son to live with him for free during college. There is no accounting of how much anyone gave. Just give what you can.
I recommend reading Cory Doctorow's novel Walkaway which describes gift economies beautifully.
“From a content discovery standpoint, I’m really interested in how we can seed conversations and seed experiences with really high-quality content — certainly, editorial publisher content”
I’ve been waiting so long for my mastodon conversations to be seeded with high quality editorial publisher content
> Also, Let's Encrypt security is a joke - they issued fake certificate without serious checking. Using unencrypted HTTP for confirmation is a vulnerability
They can’t use HTTPS if you don’t have a certificate yet
How could Letsencrypt even verify a server setup if not via DNS/HTTP? Also, verify against what? The servers are basically random strangers without identity when they first talk to LE.
There are approximately 10 Tier-1 ISPs through which majority of Internet traffic passes, and unless I misunderstood something, they can issue valid certificates for almost any domain. To me it looks like "completely compromised".
This is exactly the same as all other CA's do this.... for DV-certificates you basically place a key/special file on the webserver, or receive a verficiation code via (plaintext) email.
For EV certs there might be more validation, but users will never see the difference between EV and DV certificates.
So SSL certificates are completely unreliable; we should only wait until Russian or Chinese comrades find a good use for this attack (e.g. temporary redirecting Western traffic using BGP to validate a Let's Encrypt's cert for Western site).
They’re probably thinking of shared hosting environments that don’t have the SQLite library for PHP installed. That seems like a concern you could raise about any database connector, though
It's a bit forceful but it tells you clearly exactly what you need to do to have a good experience. Given the setup was presumably a bit fiddly this seems much better than having customers get frustrated before resorting to the manual.
