Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | mmpdev's commentslogin

Not only would we not recommend our war criminals to the ICC, we have on the books the authorization to be able to invade the Hague in case any US person was being held or tried. Hague Invasion Act / ASPA is wild.


The rest of the west is allied with the US because they’re the least evil guys, not because they’re the good guys.

I’m Dutch and knowing that the US has a constant threat of extreme violence against us written into their law scares the crap out of me. We’re supposed to be happy jolly NATO allies but srsly that shit is not cool.


> The rest of the west is allied with the US because they’re the least evil guys, not because they’re the good guys.

No, because the US controls the "free media" and politicians in those countries. It's funny how almost all Kissinger article today were positive in this country.


Least evil by what metric?


All countries of comparable power are murderous autocracies. By that metric. At least I cannot think of any that isn't, feel free to try to proof me wrong.


Liberty, rule of law etc. For all its shortcomings, the US-dominated part of the world has more of that than the rest.


> Liberty, rule of law

Maybe you should read about Kissinger and his relation with the above.


When you reply to a comment so deep down a thread you gotta take the full conversation into context. You reply to me as if I think the US kicks ass at rule of law and liberty. I’m merely saying they’re the least bad at it of the superpowers (despite monsters like Kissinger)


US centered NATO imperialism sometimes shows itself amongst all the Hollywood and the international PR indeed.


You are not an ally, you are a de facto vassal. Compared to other vassals in history you don't have to send much in the way of tribute.

Frankly, you have a pretty good deal. We provide your protection, you can do your Dutch things, and we don't bother you too much other than the occasional McDonalds garrison.


> we have on the books the authorization to be able to invade the Hague in case any US person was being held or tried. Hague Invasion Act / ASPA is wild.

That's more the reason to move the court to a country with nukes, say France, Strasbourg and put some retaliation Act in place if Americans put Strasbourg Invasion Act in place


But not every tweet through the api would be bots right? Like someone using a custom twitter client as a single user shouldn't get that label, no?


Humans are really creative. One potential outcome is a few well known ppl start using a 3rd party client, tell their followers that’s why it says bot, and the badge loses its meaning.


That's going to be tricky too because I could imagine someone offering a service to actors and other public people to help manage their twitter accounts (maybe discourage them from posting stupid shit at 1 am. I'm looking at you, Elon), in which case you wouldn't even have a 1:1 ratio.

The usual solution, historically, it to provide different levels of service based on your account type. The couple of times I've worked somewhere that the admins had a disjointed set of servers from the users was really a huge stress relief. You want admins to 'see' what the user sees, but to be able to work even if the site is being DOS'ed. And ideally you want users to be able to use the site even if the admins manage to DOS themselves (admin functions tend to have a higher fanout than end user functions, so the danger of catastrophic fanout is always higher).


One option would be to ban custom Twitter clients. As a bonus, enforcing official apps opens more possibilities for monetization. Twitter could even release a special app for advertising agencies who manage multiple accounts on behalf of their customers and charge appropriate subscription.


As a bonus? Maybe for Twitter, but as a user, I would not care for this at all.


My take is banning custom clients should be deemed an ADA violation.

You should be allowed to create your own client for any service you want, that is customized to your input needs.


> Like someone using a custom twitter client as a single user shouldn't get that label, no?

Why not? If it's a niche client not many people use such false positive would be rare. Also such people probably don't have huge audirnce and they and their audiences won't care.

And it might be deterrent against people trying to build popular alternative client that might compete with main twitter app.

I don't think aiming for 100% accurate label is on the table.


> And it might be deterrent against people trying to build popular alternative client that might compete with main twitter app.

That's horrible for users.

Twitter's iOS app is a third-party app they bought because it was so much better than their own at the time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tweetie


Yeah, but that was then and this is now. Thinghs kinda settled down since then.

The real danger of opening the API and marking all tweets made through API as BOT is that this label looses impact if some alternative client that uses API raises to prominence.

I'd say that current setup where users have no indication that something might have been posted by bot is way more horrible.


How are you going to tell?


They can distribute keys associated to an identity and have humans review the apps or bot purpose and content, but charge for the review.


is there anything stopping me from writing a browser extension to make posts on the site automatically? i did work for a guy on that sort of setup spamming used car dealership ads, and it may have been a hastle keeping it running but we got plenty of ads out.


nothing other than the fact that if they find you doing this, they'll likely ban your account.


If the private keys are distributed inside an approved client app then any competent hacker can decompile the binary and extract the keys. At that point the keys can be used by bots or other unauthorized apps, and there's no reliable way for the server to distinguish them.


> System.Linq — DistinctBy/UnionBy/IntersectBy/ExceptBy

I'm excited by having these built in. I always found it awkward to need to do: `.GroupBy(item => item.Property).Select(group => group.First())`.


Whole bunch of other good stuff for Linq users!

https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/announcing-net-6/#syst...


I have been using https://morelinq.github.io/ for a long time for all the above and more.


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

Search: