It could also be used to prevent showing an opt-in notification at all even in software that requires opt-in.

I don't have numbers, but I'm pretty sure the number of people infected by people that didn't know they were sick is significant. Imagine if all those sick people wore masks (or some substitute, like a scarf over their mouth/nose).

If we can agree that wearing a mask (or substitite) if you might be sick is a good idea, but you don't know if you might be sick, that seems to translate to wearing a mask (or substitute) is a good idea.

> that only works if you can mask a significant portion of the population without a shortage of masks for people who we know need them.

I agree it's important to reserve masks for those who need them most, but that doesn't mean we have to teach people they are not effective. We could instead teach them how "non-masks" can make very reasonable substitutes. And let's not forget that reducing the spread has a real impact on the need for healthcase workers to have them.

How so? Everything I've seen from them, including the Gov't site only say to self-isolate. They said that in the near future they may tell households to isolate, but right now only the person with symptoms.

> "people with confirmed or possible coronavirus (COVID-19) infection"

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-stay-at-...

Using browser extensions to block ads is much higher risk than doing DNS blocking. Most ad blockers have full access to all web pages, which essentially means they could trivially scrape your usernames/passwords for your email/banks/etc or perform actions on your behalf.

There's room for this to go bad (AdBlocker dev turns bad, or sells extension to a bad guy for a wad of cash, or extension has security vulnerabilities, or keys for publishing extension are not propery secured) so while DNS-level blocking might not work as well, it's definitely not an obviously-worse solution.

(though FIWI PiHole in the past had some really agressive default lists which stopped my from using it - though I set it up again recently and it's been much better - I haven't had any broken websites besides Amazon's own sponsored product links at the top of their own search results pages).

https://plus.google.com/113181962167438638669/posts/QF5pDB4X...

It's not common to rebase?

> i will communicate a force push on master to the whole team and will disable protection temporarily

Isn't that exactly what this point was about? You have branch protection enabled for master because you think it's a good idea to avoid accidental force-pushes. These comments were exactly about not having the ability to protect branches.

I'm not really sure what you're arguing for/against.

It's not a big deal to me, I'll probably just make the repos public.

When adding a site to the clear-on-exist list, the box shows

  [*.]example.com

  [*.]reddit.com

This is a little misleading... Just because there is source code on GitHub does not mean the random APK you're downloading from the internet and side-loading is safe.

If you're paranoid (and you probably should be - if I was a bad person and wanted to get malware onto your machines, I'd be making some useful "open source" app and publishing "its source code" on GitHub too), you'd want to build the app yourself! :)

https://blog.dantup.com/2016/04/have-software-developers-giv...

That it happens is bad enough, but the fact that so few care about it is reslly depressing :(

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17024057

Points: 15

# Comments: 0

That said, if Google Play Music Unlimited was either half the price (£5/mo) or was shareable with my wife for the current price, I'd probably have a different opinion!

I guess I'm a subsidiser; I don't use an ad blocker (for many reasons). I'm also slightly of the opinion that people using ad-blockers have made things worse for those that don't :(

I don't mind ads - I don't even mind advertises tracking some things to give me more relevant ads (heck, I'd tell them what I like to get more relevant ads).. I do mind obtrusive and noisy ads, and the security risks that tend to come with them (and other third party content) being slapped on every site with no thought though; and for some content I would pay to a reasonable fee to remove them.

I never said it was likely, just possible. And I wouldn't question the incompetence of anyone these days; big companies make questionable decisions all the time ;-)

I'm not doubting that's tough; but it's significantly easier to get someone to pay $1/month than $35/month. People aren't completely stupid; they won't just blindly pay any amount just because they'd decided they'd pay something.

Like I said though; if I was making this decision, I'd start high.

I don't think people don't complain about stuff enough, we get taken for rides by big companies all the time while their CEOs take home massive pay packets. People should fight for better services and lower prices more; it works!