And if Facebook's policy was "real names for LGBTQFM only", or "real names for gay black Irish jews", I would be right there on the front lines with you in my outrage. Don't mess with the protected classes. But that's not the situation we have here. The situation is, "real names for everyone, regardless of race, color, creed, nationality", yada yada yada. Regardless of how poorly they're implementing it, that's their policy. Don't like it, don't go there.
That's exactly the point I'm trying to make. Nobody owes you anything - not Facebook, not Google, not the coffeeshop down the street. Governments that are not your own owe you less than nothing, if such a thing exists. Don't like the service they provide, or how they do their business? Don't whine about it online and clog up our feeds, just... stop using the service. Behold - instant peace.
It's a 'privilege' to not be on Facebook? On Maslow's Hierarchy Of Needs, nowhere is there any mention of 'online services' or 'Facebook access', or even 'Internet access'. If ever there was a textbook "Sh*t HN Says" comment worthy of the moniker, yours is it.
Facebook is a business, just like your local grocer, just like any number of restaurants, just like a bookstore. If any of the above aren't giving you the service you desire, you are welcome to pack up and take your custom elsewhere. Rinse and repeat this pattern enough times, and the 'giant' will either go out of business or change their behavior as to woo you back. That's commerce. If your friends will only ever interact with you on Facebook (or any single online service), my suspicion is that they aren't really your friends and it's time to find some new ones.
Is there some reason I'm not aware of that makes "leaving Facebook" not the reasonable, default, option? If they REALLY are "naive, dangerous, and evil", just... don't use their service. Hit them where it hurts and take your eyeballs elsewhere.
In Seattle and surrounding areas, Comcast is more or less the only game in town (with Centurylink a distant, distant second) if you're not in one of a dozen high-rise apartment buildings. For all their marketing around 'extensive IPv6 rollout', I've found their deployment to be hideously broken and their support staff deeply ignorant. Been here 3 years, moved once, and it's just terrible. My latest foray into trying to get delegation to work was this past weekend, and I had a Comcast supervisor (in Business class!) tell me that "static anything is not a priority for the vast majority of their customers. You can either have static v4 addresses or v6 connectivity, but not both" after several hours of troubleshooting and 'automatically closed/resolved tickets' with their level 2 support folks. It's one of the more brazen "we dare you to stop being our customer" moves I've certainly been privvy to.
tl; dr - Comcast v6 works great on Business-class until you push a static v4 config, then it just stops responding to DHCPv6 and SLAAC requests. Ignorance and aggravation ensued from Comcast support, at all levels I was able to get ahold of. Being a monopoly is awesome.
You want to set up an 'egress only' v6 gateway for your /64s (or however you carve up your netblock). That is going to be the closest analogue to behind-a-NAT-like behavior.
Square is just as bad as PayPal, IME. Lots of arbitrary rules, clients unable to pay me, funds withheld for no good reason, etc. I'll stick with bank transfers (ACH) or Bitcoin, personally.
Nope. Why people/companies insist the Microsoft is usable on the open internet today, despite all evidence to the contrary, is beyond me. They are not, and have not been, suitable-for-the-datacenter/internet for well over a decade now. Let the company and its swiss-cheese OS die already.
I think some of it is a branding fail on Mattermost's part (or a branding win on Slack's). Case in point - I was recently in talks with a non-tech company who are HUGE users of freemium Slack. They don't want to actually spend money on it, but they have a person whose (partial) job description is to monitor all 15+ Slack channels for 'anything that looks important, and archive the conversation wholesale into the company wiki'. If they paid for Slack, their annual cost would be $10k+. I proposed to build them a Mattermost server for a flat rate of $5k and they're responsible for the hosting costs (~$20/mo for a VM somewhere). For a small recurring fee I would handle regular updates, etc, to the server. CEO's response was "Nope, we like Slack", with no further explanation or elaboration. The rest of the teams had been demo'd on Mattermost, agreed it did All The Things(tm), agreed it was the superior solution because then Jim in shipping wasn't tasked with copy/pasting convos into the wiki, etc, but in the words of the CFO, "<CEO> is irrationally attached to being a 'Slack user'". Not so much that they'd be willing to pay money for it though.
I'd be curious to see how the numbers from wholesaleinternet.net stack up - auto-provisioned bare metal hosting for the same (monthly) price as cloud VMs.
If you're billing hourly, you're doing it wrong. You should be billing in advance for the value of the project to the business. Then their costs are fixed, and you are incentivized to finish quicker, modulo however long it takes plus 'figuring it out' time. See: www.expensiveproblem.com/hbin
Dude, you can do it yourself with a gmail throwaway. 'hireme.myname@gmail.com' or similar, set your vacation auto-responder appropriately, and have 'realdeal.myname@gmail.com' auto-forward to your real address.
Yes, I've gotten my last 3 non-consulting jobs through this method. Before I switched to FT consulting, pretty much all of my jobs were through recruiters. The 'wizardry' is basically having a well put together resume (I've had several people/orgs/etc take a look at it over the years and give me optimization tips), and I maintain profiles at dice, monster, and indeed. That's... about it. I avoid LinkedIn like the plague because I detest the company and its practices, but I'm sure folks who are less picky than me could do something similar on LI and EASILY get more than 200+ contacts a month.
I take it one step further: the email address on my resume is a black hole. Its only purpose is to feed an autoresponder who kicks back a warm, generic, email thanking the recruiter for their time, acknowledging they have a difficult job, and lays out my requirements for any position: what I am and am not interested in doing, my salary/hourly/per-project requirements, my location requirements (100% remote), etc. At the bottom, there's another email alias along the lines of 'yesireallydidreadthisgiganticemail2017@mydomain.com' that goes straight to me. I ask the recruiters to not email that address unless they've read the whole thing, and their position matches my requirements. I get 200+ emails to the catch-all autoresponder a month, and maybe 1 (qualified!) reply to the 'its really me' alias every six months. About once a month, I get an email to the 'its really me' alias from a recruiter expressing joy, amusement, and thanks for spelling out what I'm looking for so early in the process. All in all, it's a far more pleasant way to go about passively searching for The Next Big Role(tm).