neilalexander

Try connecting to the Wi-Fi at the London ExCeL or the Paris Expo sometime and then say that again with a straight face.

Weird take, but you do you.

This reminded me somewhat of Pony Messenger which does one "mail drop" a day.

Why would it answer it? This is about RCS, not iMessage. No, Android will not get iMessage.

They will either just automatically turn it off in a future device software update, or they'll just post a deadline after which they will delete user data and prevent sync if it isn't disabled by the user.

Half-serious question: what real use is there for 32GB RAM in this form factor with a low-power SoC?

It opens anything — the "Open" dialog will allow you to select any filetype and you can also drop any kind of file onto the TextEdit icon in the Dock to open it.

As for plain-text, you can go into the Settings and switch it into plain-text mode, which it remembers.

You can even set it not to append ".txt" to the filename when saving, allowing you to enter whatever file extension you want when saving.

I've often wondered whether people would be less confused if they replaced the word "Input" on the remote with the word "Switch".

For people who don't really understand what a set-top box is or how it works or how it is connected, why would we expect "Input" to have any meaning to them at all?

If software engineers were responsible for user experience, they'd be trying to teach emacs to grandma.

Your comment is a bit pointless on a post that has nothing to do with charging, but regardless, the iPhone 15 and 16 models both have USB-C.

The UniFi E7 also has a 10GE port.

Seeing as the majority of Wi-Fi devices will get absolutely nowhere near the theoretical maximum though, even 2.5GE is unlikely to be saturated.

Further to that, there are plenty of people who can't really articulate what a web browser actually is or how a website differs from an app. It's not clear to me whether these users would be more accepting of a PWA or if they would be even further confused by them, particularly if they have to be left to find the app on the web first in order to "install" it, even more so if they've never bothered to look at what all those buttons in their web browser actually do.

To reduce condensation and mould.

> because you can actually use your computer as a computer

This is such a vague and pointless argument that somehow manages to mean absolutely nothing at all. What defines "to use a computer as a computer"?

Do you mean to say that all of the things I do day-to-day on a Mac (like software development, communication, media consumption, life organisation) don't count?

You're never going to find a computer that satisfies absolutely everyone but there are plenty of computers out there that satisfy many people's expectations of what a computer should do or be.

If you aren't on an iPhone already, switching carriers might be easier.

It doesn't have a polished export UI yet but it is absolutely possible: https://github.com/bluesky-social/pds/blob/main/ACCOUNT_MIGR...

Yggdrasil was actually inspired in part by cjdns but the design is very different. We care deeply about scale and we want an Yggdrasil network to be able to grow organically without requiring a strict hierarchy, huge amounts of state etc. We’re still working on it of course but for now the public test network is somewhere around 5000-6000 nodes and continues to work pretty well as it grows.

Truncating the public key to fit in an IPv6 address isn’t totally ideal, agreed, but for now it means that just about any existing IPv6-capable application will work over Yggdrasil without modification, which is a nice property for a testnet.

One or two others have also asked for a project update on the blog so I’ll be sure to draft something up soon! :-) Thanks for your interest!

The name wouldn’t necessarily stay if we succeed in our goals and formally specify a protocol, but for now it hasn’t really been much of a barrier in terms of interest or experimental deployments.

Anonymity isn’t a goal for Yggdrasil anymore than it is a goal for for BGP, OSPF, BATMAN etc. Anonymous networks also generally have very high costs/overheads as they often engineer long and indirect paths for obscurity. See the generally poor performance/reliability of Tor circuits for an example of why we probably wouldn’t want the entire Internet to work this way.

We did spend a little bit of time documenting the earlier v0.3 protocol, as you have linked, but the protocol has changed significantly in design twice since then. v0.4 changed the DHT quite a bit and v0.5 removed the DHT altogether. As a research project it likely will continue to change until we settle on a design we are happier with, at which point we will definitely spend more time documenting it.

The need for ordered/reliable links is mostly for convenience of development at this stage, but that can be fixed for sure.

Definitely not abandoned, but it’s a free-time project for myself and another developer. At the end of last year we released version 0.5 with a new protocol design, and roughly a month ago released 0.5.9 with link cost changes to dramatically improve network latency.

Better yet, route all calls for all disconnected/unassigned numbers in their part of the numbering plan to it. It would probably kill robocalling overnight.

You can hit a RAM limit on some lower-end motherboards quite quickly depending on the memory controller and you might only get so far with GPUs as well depending on the type of PCIe slots.

Even within Volvo's own lineup, my C40, built in China, has had far fewer quality issues than my previous S60 had, which was built in the USA.

Not everyone lives in cities, not everyone can afford to live in cities, not everyone lives in areas well connected by public transportation and not everyone can afford to live in areas well connected by public transportation.

What isn't clear is how you believe this manages complexity. What does it actually do that my browser and desktop aren't already doing for me?

As with all of these "desktop in a browser" demos, it looks and feels fun for a couple minutes, but there's no story-telling here as to why I'd actually want to commit to using it instead of the tried-and-tested tools that are native, accessible and already right there.

Believe it or not, blocking ping at your router would have done absolutely nothing to prevent this, as those packets would likely have still been delivered to the router and possibly saturated the link anyway, regardless of whether the recipient was dropping them or not. That is why nearly all DoS flood-style attacks are UDP-based — unless you are behind a CGNAT or an upstream restrictive firewall, you can't really opt out of those packets being routed to you.

Disabling IPv6 in 2024 is bad advice. IPv6 adoption is undeniably on the rise. Better advice would be to ensure that the IPv6 firewall is configured to sane defaults, i.e. allow established/related, drop invalid, reject unexpected, just like you'd expect an IPv4 firewall to be.

Disabling ICMP is also bad advice. If you want Path MTU discovery to work, you need ICMP. If you want to be told about TTL exceeded (which usually shows a routing loop), you need ICMP. If you are uniquely worried about ping for some reason, then block those ICMP type numbers specifically, not the entire protocol.