This whole long thread makes me sad. Not least because I kind of find myself agreeing that tone tags do take something away from the joke. Not to say the commenter is flawed somehow for not getting the context, I didn't either right away.
No need to talk down to my neurodiverse friends, they understand irony and sarcasm in written text just fine. The neurotypical ones sometimes miss it, though.
One is an objective statement of the world, the other is a subjective statement about you personally.
If these things mean the same to you, you're not parsing the English correctly, which points to a larger comprehension issue that further explains why you didn't get the original sarcasm.
>Of course I pointed and laughed at you, you were (and still are) acting very poorly towards others.
A non-confrontational mention that a tone marker would have helped, which you turned into an attack somehow (?), then you took pedantry to a new level (not uncommon on HN, but lol), and then after other insults on the OPs intelligence you say that they are acting poorly? What a laugh.
Communication is collaborative. If you can't accept the fact that sometimes someone might say "Hey, this would have helped me understand you better" without losing your mind over it, I feel sorry for anyone else you converse or collaborate with.
Shame on anyone who doesn't memorize comments from years ago. Or people with English as a 2nd+ language and may not glean the intricacies of written English that you think are so obvious.
That is not what he said, and again the misuse of quotations to make it seem like that's literally what he said is definitely not helping the situation.
It appears that you are now the one having trouble parsing English.
You know how in a book when fictional characters are talking how they use quotation marks to indicate that? In my comment, my fictional someone was talking, so I used quotes.
Perhaps you could stop telling me how to write my comments and stop telling me to change my writing behavior for your sake, just because you misunderstood?
I would argue that "failing" to interpret sarcasm in this context is generally the fault of the person employing sarcasm. With none of the other cues that are available IRL (tone of voice, body language, facial expression, etc.) there's very little to tell a reader what is meant to be taken literally, versus taken as sarcasm. So yeah, if a writer doesn't include /s or ⸮ or whatever, that's on them if their words are misunderstood.
What evidence is there that "everybody" else did "get it"? And what does that even have to do with what I just said? Choosing to communicate poorly is a bad decision, even if some people happen - by chance - to understand you correctly in spite of that bad decision.
I didn't understand the reference but I didn't have to quickly scan to other comments because the next comment mentioned that it was a reference.
I would also say that sometimes being exclusive can make a joke funnier to the in-group. Denoting your sarcasm can make humor less attractive, in the same way explaining a joke ruins it. Sometimes you want to be vague to see who catches the signals.
Some people, myself included, will react poorly when requested to perform additional work when additional work from the requester also could have been performed.
As someone who recently migrated off of Dropbox, you can get most of the features with open source systems like Syncthing and a self hosted server.
The main complication to implement is encryption at rest for the data (I use luks2 on a hd and the fs of a raspi controller) and secure remote access (wireguard works really well and is easy to manage).
I wireguard into my remote systems and have Syncthing configured only to local network (no relays etc). It works beautifully; not missing dropbox at all.
I am still working out a viable alternative for things like document scanning, but I have no regrets owning my data.
I can install drop box in under ten minutes. I don't have to manage security patches for all the binaries in the stack. My data is available in network edge locations close to me or the people I share it with. I can turn dollars into more storage very easily. I don't have to configure user permissions and groups in more than one place.
Also, what you described is not "sftp + cvs + vps" ;D
Syncthing makes Dropbox look downright barbarian. Especially if you combine Syncthing with Android and a NAS or home server. iOS is... not really capable of sync outside Apple ecosystem. And this is true even with Dropbox. Not an Android fanboy. Just stating the fact. I take a picture on my Android phone and I don't have to think about it. It's now on my home server, it's encrypted, it's automatically backed up, etc. I have an app that takes a backup of my phone and puts it in a single file. Literally I press a button and my entire phone is backed up via syncthing. I use KeePass. My passwords are in sync at all times, on every device. There is also KDE Connect, which I have yet to try out.
Even before Syncthing, Unison existed since 1995. Which was the true free software version of Dropbox. You never needed a bunch of hacks to get automatic sync working on Linux. Syncthing is a bit easier to configure, IMO.
Can you right-click a large file (in your day-to-day file manager), hit Copy Link, and email the link to someone so they can download it (without having to give them any further credentials)?
Dropbox has invested in infrastructure to do things like index and search the contents of your files.
VPS provider doesn't even necessarily have read access to your data, and because you aren't relying on them for search/index features, encryption is much less expensive from a functionality standpoint.
They typically don't spy on their customers as much as a service like dropbox does.
Before downvoting, ask yourself: When was the last time a VPS provider scanned the disk contents of their customers? And when was the last time they booted someone for using full disk encryption?
Meanwhile, dropbox proudly proclaims how they scan the contents of their users' files.
Edit: you substantially changed your comment after complaining about downvotes. That’s not cool. Note that you edited it.
VPS companies delete customer data for all kinds of reasons, just as arbitrarily as Dropbox. I’ve had VPSes at dozens and dozens of places over the years. I’ve seen them accidentally delete servers, purposefully disable stuff for what they claimed were hacked sites that weren’t actually hacked (so that’s scanning right there), I’ve seen them go out of business because the owner was 15 years old, I’ve seen them go out of business because they sold to Endurance or whoever, I’ve seen their data centers catch on fire — taking everyone’s data with it, I’ve seen them accidentally delete whole clusters.
And I excuse it in most of those cases because it is a VPS I pay a pittance for and don’t run production on, but the risk is always there. Trusting your data to Dropbox or OneDrive makes a lot more logical sense, especially if you aren’t knowingly violating any of their rules.
And yes, you can colocate. I’ve done that too. But I no longer have the energy to do that, especially if my box is in a data center I can’t physically access.
I backup about 5 different places because I’m always afraid of someone fucking me over. But for Dropbox to do this, is truly terrible. Especially for an unlisted rule.
Definitely not happening with my Synology NAS unless I rage quit and throw it out a window (and it backs up to Backblaze B2).
It is unfortunately more of a time commitment then paying for Dropbox (which I previously did, for years), but I won’t lose all my data because of them finding something to complain about with a hash of one of my files (or however they’re scanning content) and nuking my account. That’s simply not an option.
Syncthing + NextCloud + rsnapshot backups would have been my open-source alternative recommendation, but of course not everyone wants to take the time to learn that skillet, set that up, and maintain it.
You can get the whole package from Hetzner pre-configured, or just configure it yourself. I manage our team's nextcloud installation, and installing on bare-metal (sans containers) is a half day job at most.
Moreover Nextcloud supports WebDav which allows tools like Zotero to directly tap into that.
Would you say that the install and maintenance load for both systems (Dropbox vs packages containers) is the same?
Like, I'm confident my tech illiterate parents could get drop box running. Ease of use and UX are features.
I'm not saying the self hosted stack is bad, and in fact it's probably better in many ways. But it doesn't have the same feature set if you consider usability a feature, imo.
What does Syncthing add to the Nextcloud capabilities? (Honest question because I'm curious; I have a NextCloud & snapshot to encrypted S3 backup solution already.)
I admit I have not used NextCloud, but the hands-off automatic file-sync-between-devices that Syncthing provides has been transparent and seamless. It has required no babysitting after initial set up.
I have forgotten if NextCloud does this, because I don't use NextCloud at this time, nor have I.
Yep. But if your user base is likely to include Americans, then you might want to consider filtering them out. (As it could be shocking to read.)
Note the word consider, by the way. I'm not demanding anything here, I'm saying the author should make a deliberate choice about their inclusion rather than including them just because they were auto generated.
For the curious, I think they mean decimal values 16408693 and 16410119. Which have other archaic meanings but their primary modern meanings are a slur. 16410349 is apparently British slang for exhausted, so maybe gets a pass?
You can easily live in Seattle city limits without owning a car, and our transit story is pretty bad. In a city that really funded transit it would be trivial.
Why the condescending state-the-bleeding-obvious question? Renting and sharing makes little sense for me personally. I answer a similar question here re taxis and public transport: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31690450
Find a space you enjoy. I enjoy getting able to walk to the grocery store, bookshop, several cafes, many restaurants, hair salon, library, tattoo parlor, beer shop, movie theater, etc.
How many of those places can you visit without a car?
I actually have a bunch of those places I can visit without a car, and I never do, because they are all small, and don't have the selection I want. The few I do visit are more expensive than they should be because their rent is very high.
So I drive about 10 minutes and go to the larger stores, the selection is better and the prices are better because the land is not so crowded.
I have family who live in a very dense city without a car - every time I visit they "stock up" and go on multiple car trips with me to visit slightly distant stores to buy all the stuff that is cheaper, or hard to transport without a car.
The car isn't going away because it's simply too useful. No matter how hard you try to make a city that supposedly doesn't need one, the car option is still better.
Heh the only one missing from that list in my small town is a bookstore; the Walmart book section doesn't really cut it.
One thing people can get confused on is that density doesn't necessarily go hand-in-hand with mixed usage - you could have relatively low density areas that are extremely mixed so there's always basically everything within 15 minute walk, and you could have very high density apartment buildings with nearly no services to speak of.
Suburbs are especially bad at this because they segregate the living and the sleeping areas far apart from each other (but relatively short by car).
I thought his argument was pro-parking. As such, asking about what he can get to without a car is irrelevant, because he doesn't want to _be_ without a car.
The US absolutely tore up cities to make them more car friendly. Redlining and slum clearing were used as justifications to knock down entire neighborhoods to put more roads in. Most old American cities started as port towns with streetcar suburbs, and then they tore the trains out.
We don't have medieval cities, but saying cities were designed around the car is patently false.
Yes, the fifties and sixties caused huge redesigns, but we can undo those.
> We don't have medieval cities, but saying cities were designed around the car is patently false.
It's not. Cities have literally been created from nothing in the last few decades. Just because NYC, Atlanta, DC, etc. are old are have a history of redlining does not mean that every city does. Case in point: the cities around where I grew up were built in the last 3 decades. Those cities didn't have a choice but to have zoning laws and miles of road.
I mean, sure. Some places have become urban centers recently and that's fair. But coast to coast, our biggest population centers were all established and built up before car centric planning.
I live in Seattle, for instance, which used to have a network of rails. They've all been torn out and we're just now putting them back.
Seattle is geographically constrained. Most/all of the old cities (and metros) have sprawled to ungodly degrees like atlanta or la. How do you undo 70 years of development (ie, tens or hundreds of billions of dollars) spent on sprawling?
These cities removed transit systems and housing to build roads and parking. It will take time, but doing the reverse is totally possible. Most cities were filled with streetcars and dense housing at one point.
