anon

In the US, perhaps. But the logic that “if you work at a Catholic school you gotta do their shit” is precisely the problem here, and what needs to change. In many other countries, a contract is unenforceable if it contains discriminatory terms. The onus ought to be on religious schools to adapt to contemporary societal norms if they want to engage with society through labor, procurement, etc contracts. Otherwise we’re just tolerating and perpetuating little islands of discrimination and bigotry in the name of religious freedom.

In many other countries, such contractual provisions would be considered abusive and be thrown out by the court, so that a religious school (or any bigoted employer) could not enforce discriminatory terms under the guise of institutional or personal beliefs. I find it doubly weird that this situation can be boiled down so casually to contract law when it ought to be a constitutional matter.

U.S.* court, Op. It’s important to add that to the title and not let readers have to figure it out.

I agree with you.

A company’s core business and skillset is rarely to manage an on-prem IT infrastructure, which is a highly complex endeavor these days. Security most always benefits from being put in the hands of cloud providers such as Microsoft, Amazon, or Google, who can mobilize the best talent and apply economies of scale and modern best practices to cybersecurity across an entire stack.

It also means far fewer liability headaches for the companies that transfer this difficult and onerous responsibility to cloud providers. It’s not even necessarily cheaper to go full cloud; I’ve seen multiple examples where it wasn’t, but the reduction in complexity and liability made common sense. So even the “LaTe-StAgE CaPiTaLiSm!!” claim is just a tired trope at this point.

It’s easy to focus on one publicized exploit of Microsoft’s cloud like this one, and not see the other side of the argument of how many exploits were avoided over the years by not having individual companies manage their own servers. It’s still entirely plausible that the general move to cloud infrastructure since the late 2000s is a net win for cybersecurity in aggregate.

I would also add that whether other cloud customers might be breached simultaneously in the extremely rare event of a cloud-wide exploit is not a consideration when a company decides to move from on-prem to cloud. It’s just a Moloch problem that doesn’t and shouldn’t concern them.

C’est trendy de taper sur MacOS mais c’est un excellent OS du quotidien, moderne, basé sur UNIX, performant, privacy-friendly, et qui marche “out of the box”. Le gaming est décevant mais pour tout le reste je plussoie.

Title is borked - what was on sale were credentials to remotely view home cameras in which child nudity may occasionally be involved, and still pictures of the same. There is no mention of abuse nor deliberate exploitation of children. It’s still completely fucked up, illegal, and a massive privacy breach, though.

Ctrl-enter is your friend! Assuming you’re visiting a .com TLD.

Because you're both claiming to understand the failing of reddit's UI and claiming the same UI as a reliable indicator of all comments getting deleted. Rather, it seems some comments were likely missed because of the shitty UI. Relying on reddit's UI for this is the specific user error to which I was referring. I hope that's clearer.

Thanks for clarifying. I understand the failing of Reddit’s UI from reading about it in the replies here. I didn’t know about it when I first posted, so there is no contradiction there. I also had no reason then to believe that either the redact tool (which reported deleting all comments) nor the Reddit UX (which reported no comment left) were inaccurate in their reporting.

Had either displayed wording similar to that service page you linked to, I would agree with you that it would have been user error to ignore it.

Barring that, I think it’s a stretch to claim user error when an obscure technical limitation of Reddit makes its UX misleading in a non-obvious way.

I haven’t nuked my account yet and will only do so once I am certain that all my comments are permanently deleted (some were missed due to a design limitation in the way Reddit finds them). But practically speaking, I am no longer using that account, so it is functionally equivalent to having deleted it.

I have no regret so far. Deleting my trail of crumbs has assuaged my fear of doxxing (which, in all honesty, is orthogonal to the API shutdown fiasco and was worth doing selectively anyway). It has also given me back time that I would spend mindlessly doomscrolling on Reddit. I am now more deliberate in my use of social media and the Fediverse, which is an improvement in my online habits. For that I am grateful.

This is very good to know, thank you.

I had indeed read and understood the earlier comment that you linked.

I just got confused by your “user error” suggestion, because I don’t see how this qualifies as one.

First, the Reddit API is broken, because the select query sent by the deletion tool receives less than a full set (as if there was an implied LIMIT clause on the server side). This leads the deletion tool to erroneously announce it has processed all comments.

Two, the Reddit UX is broken, because the profile’s Comments page incorrectly returns an empty set due to a silent design limitation (as described in the linked comment).

There is literally no mechanism to find leftover comments through either the Reddit API or UX, because both are broken. The only workaround is to use a search engine that had indexed those leftover comments.

That’s the whole point of my original post, and I don’t see where the “user error” may come in.

I dont think getting banned will remove posts and comments from your history that haven’t been flagged as rule-breaking. All that will happen is that your banworthy comment will get deleted and you’ll lose access to your account, which is the worst outcome because then you can no longer manually delete your history.