Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | more craftyguy's comments login

All of that 'telemetry' collection isn't free. OS choice definitely matters, some OS vendors will insist on default sevices and 'require' the ability to arbitarily enable more for you as they see fit over time.

You don't own your PC running windows, microsoft does.


The text of the bill hasn't been submitted yet, so we don't know what 'other purposes' is.

So in typical 'hacker' 'news' fashion, this has been upvoted based purely on title alone!


> unpopular opinion - I like daylight savings.

lol. the title is literally about making DST permanent. What's 'unpopular' about that?


because just about every single person in the comments is bashing this?


They mean 'free' as in freedom, not 'free' as in beer. There's a (huge) difference.


They're so focused on privacy, they only tested it on a browser that spews 'telemetry.'


We've tested on a number of browsers but not often enough on some of them - like Firefox. We don't like all the data Chrome collects on it's users, but it makes up for the vast majority of usage on desktop and Android so it's important to test it most thoroughly on the most thoroughly used browser. We did the same on Safari which is a bit more private than Chrome, but not totally. We need to test more, perhaps something like browserstack needs to make it's way back into my toolchain.


It appears to be another silo for (as the 'owner' put it elsewhere) reducing 'complexity' (i.e. mastadon is too hard because users have to choose an instance). Instead they want you to use their walled garden. It's a bit silly to claim any focus on privacy when you still have to absolutely trust one group of random people on the internet with no option to host it yourself, etc.


I don't feel sorry at all for Microsoft. They have a long history of harassing developers (e.g., [1]. It's nice to see them bear some of that for once.

1. https://www.infoworld.com/article/2676459/microsoft-sues-lin...


The title doesn't mention feelings or thoughts, so I have no idea what you are going on about. OP is correct, this title this title tries to masquerade opinion as fact, and is total misleading clickbait.


Could you explain why you think having the word "may" in a title implies that it is referencing a fact?

I've added the definitions for you, because I am genuinly confused:

may /mā/ verb 1.expressing possibility. "that may be true"

--

fact /fakt/noun a thing that is known or proved to be true.


Sure, but anything that can happen, may happen. The world may end tomorrow. That's entirely within the realm of universal possibility, but it is also entirely unlikely and therefore clickbait.


but this article didn't say anything can happen, it is measuring a shift in the opinions of those who became unemployed during the pandemic, and the context of this is congress is currently negotiating a stimulus package to help those in need.

My question to the OP, and maybe you, is why does that not matter to you?

I don't see how that is deceptive, sensationalized or misleading to be considered clickbait


Here's a proper, non-clickbaity title for that description: "Many fear permanent job loss" or "Job loss anxiety grows" or "Nearly half of all workers fear permanent job loss". There's a difference between statistical probability based on economic analysis and sentimental analysis based on current mood. Sentiment does matter, but it's also easy to be unrealistically pessimistic in the midst of a trough.


Sorry I find your suggestions unacceptable because the point of the article, and I think this is the root of your where your misinterpretation stems from, is there is a measurable change in the opinions of those who lost their job. Before they felt like the jobs would come back, now they think they are permanent.

That is a loss in confidence. your alternative titles contain no such information and aren't accurately describing what is happening.

I'm just going to ignore the rest of your analysis because it doesn't seem to be relevant and distracts from the point.


The loss of confidence is the story. That is not reflected in the headline. The story is about sentiment. The headline implies a more serious undertone. It's not irrelevant. Clickbait and sensationalism is a big problem these days, if you haven't noticed. In fact, it may lead to the collapse of Western civilization. At least, that's my feelings on the matter anyways.


Society generally gets more out of research than a bunch of gainfully employed physicists.


i totally agree (scientifically trained myself, took physics at Fermilab in fact); just wonder if that was the point


They didn't say 'all', they said 'many'. So your one example doesn't 'beg to differ' much in the way of OP's point.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: