rincebrain

In contrast, I have never owned a USB-C to HDMI cable, and I don't know of any device except perhaps my phone that might be able to make use of one.

They say pretty directly in the post that they didn't want to deal with the hassles around dongles and uncommon ports for using this as a Linux PC in their pocket.

They do appear to be trying to build something a bit more bespoke than that, where they want something like Fedora Silverblue or what systemd seems to want to present, in terms of contained overlays for snapshotting when you make changes and then going "oh no" without requiring a full reinstall.

God knows if they'll end up scaling back their goals, but the vision isn't "just" a few custom integrations.

They mention in the comments intending to have modes that solely run on the microcontroller, so I imagine that might help somewhat.

This also feels like the target market is people who said they dangled this off an RPi-alike to do something that the microcontroller simply did not have the processing to do.

From my understanding, the problem is volume.

You want to land a substantial amount of, ahem, shit in there, since don't just want it to colonize one portion of the gut, and it's got quite a lot of competition.

So you would be talking a truly astonishing number of pills, I think, to compare to the volume you can manage with a tube.

WP suggests that it's about 100g (or 100000mg) of actual feces then mixed in a larger volume of saline or milk, and you'd probably need to have additional volume for assumed losses and whatever coating you think would work.

That is a _huge_ amount to put in pills.

Yes, I've had a number of these.

One of the most annoying ones combined these two properties, so depending on various internal races, typing a four letter word would either open one program, the folder that program was installed in (!?), or attempt to Bing the common word

I think what drives me mad is its nondeterminism.

If I hit Winkey and type a string, it should not be the case that I get different results from doing that 6 times in a row because it depends whether some background task which changes the results finishes first.

I must say, for a library advertising handling of streams of data, the absence of a stream utility to [input] | fc | fc -d surprised me.

I understand this is more the primitive that you would build such a thing on top of, just that the first question I always have for novel compressors is "how do they do on these example streams of data".

There's pretty noticable differences in ability to self-regulate between people who had unfiltered access to computers and smartphones when growing up and not, beyond simply generational shifts.

I think the parent's assumption is that 16 is old enough for those problems to be largely avoided even if you gave them unfiltered access, which is what makes it not just kicking the can down the road.

I've met a lot of people in the US who assume they cannot afford to fly anywhere, much less to another country, without having ever priced any part of it, they simply Knew from cultural osmosis they were not The Kind Of People Who Could Do That.

I am assuming that's what they meant.

I don't think I said I agreed with them, or that the position had no flaws, I just said I thought their stance was sincerely held.

People can earnestly believe illogical or inconsistent things. Arguably those are even easier to get stuck believing, as you already had to accept some friction in the inconsistencies earlier in your internalizing them, so now you're even further into sunk costs around it.

One would hope.

I have never personally owned one, but I have been told that some Alienware and similar flavored devices have had issues like this when you closed their bespoke Alienware management software because it was the thing driving the fan controls.

Not the main focus but, FYI, a number of pieces of hardware will default to full tilt fans unless you have their tooling running to manage things.

NVIDIA GPUs were infamous for doing this with nouveau on less ideally supported cards, for example.

My mental model remains that the Windows team is mostly governed by designers on Macs who want to see a user-visible change to get their promo and never use Windows.

I think it's an extension of the premise that you should just be taking the whole stable tree with all its patches constantly, whether they're labeled as security fixes or not, because you can never really know for sure some bugs weren't security bugs.

I don't agree with the premise, but I do think it's a sincerely held one.

As an addendum to anyone who finds this.

After an extended back and forth and them temporarily marking my account as active so they could look around and try things, linking the accounts by logging into Amazon and One Medical in Chrome worked.

I generally use Firefox these days, but was pretty sure we had tried Firefox, Chrome, and Safari at one point previously in troubleshooting, so I don't know if some machinery on their end changed or I'm an unreliable narrator, but I thought I'd mention this in case anyone else finds it.

The part where lots of people have historically trusted LLM responses without verification, more than trying to sort through the dross on Google or Bing search results is, I think, the point.

No, if you have a dual-homed stack right now, and they only expose IPv4, you connect over IPv4, you don't attempt to connect over IPv6 and get connection denied.

That's rather the problem - there's no trivial way to mimic that policy transparently while enabling IPv6, because most stacks will default to using IPv6 if they're dual-homed and expose both, and won't fall back if IPv6 connects but gives an error. (Offhand, I think the best you could do would be to tell everyone that you're migrating to a new URI scheme to allow cloning, with IPv6 enabled, and that as part of that, you'll have to update your allow/deny rules, then, after a truly astonishingly long time and lots of nagging of anyone who never does it, make the old path an alias of the new one and let the last remaining people break.)

You may enjoy this[1] article about its history and where the dev wound up.

[1] - https://web.archive.org/web/20180329033107/https://motherboa...

If you slapped a pixel font in, you'd really want to rework the whole UI to not look jarring with the aliased font you'd most likely use to evoke the nostalgia, and that's a substantial rabbit hole, but also not one you necessarily need to rework the underlying functionality to do, e.g. it's easy to do later if you build it right initially.

Kind of?

Accuracy is valuable, but as illustrated by the early days of people using buggy emulators for SNES games on phones and the DS/3DS, people will tolerate buggy but running on their hardware over correct but unplayable.

Not really.

I've loopback mounted disk images over network filesystems for many years without any recurring issues outside of macOS. It's not rocket science, particularly if you have a reliable network connection.

I'm aware there's a long tail of possible issues that can come up, but most of the complaints I've seen amount to "I have a reliable connection and Time Machine is still a tire fire", which suggests that the problem exists outside of that particular set of edge cases.

(It seems to genuinely be that nobody at Apple really cares about network filesystems at this point - people in this thread talking up AFP makes me want to look at migrating _to_ using it for my mac's backups, because SMB on macOS randomly drops or hangs for no reason and Time Machine at least twice has just started stating the backup was completely unreadable, leading to me having to restore the backup filesystem from backups.

And attempting to use NFS on macOS somehow makes everything three times as buggy, like they special cased SMB shares to not be touched in some random "touch everything synchronously" calls throughout the OS but didn't do it with NFS shares, so Finder will now take seconds or minutes to do things that shouldn't involve that share, but as soon as you remove it, it stops doing so.)

My only annoyance with "Green Ethernet" things is that often they seem to work poorly.

The dedicated machine I still keep around for Windows things has two onboard 2.5GbE ports. It will apparently sometimes, even with all power saving features turned off, randomly negotiate down to 100 mbit if I leave the machine alone for a bit, and then stay at that speed forever unless I manually reset the link after wondering why transferring large amounts of data is bottlenecking severely.

My question would be, I suppose, how well do they work for extended intervals (e.g. 30+ minutes of saturated traffic)?

I've tried buying several USB3 2.5/5/10GbE copper adapters, apparently mostly Aquantia under the hood, and all but one of them would, even with fans actively pointed at them cooling them, rapidly reach a temperature at which they would stop operating entirely, which has turned me off of trying to explore more.

It might be true that that's how most of the money gets made on them now, but famously for many years they refused to try to make such a thing officially, so I doubt that was the nominal reason to start them.

I wonder what makes botting that much more trivial/productive on Classic.

In general, "you are never allowed to use our products again" is a horrible idea in any industry where all the focus is around trying to get _more_ people to try them.

It's part of why a lot of places might ban your account but they won't ban you-the-person if you make a new one, necessarily - even if every ban was accurately assessed, shrinking your potential player base permanently by even 0.5% annually compounds really badly over time.

(The notable exceptions usually include things where they're banning you for exposing them to legal liability in some fashion, because the risk of you doing it again is so large.)

> You are moving the goalpost.

I'm not the one moving the goalpost; my argument was that Apple's incentives are not in favor of them permitting even the appearance that they might allow that kind of compromise, your argument with that wall of articles appeared to be that Apple has a history of making decisions inconsistent with that, which I disputed. If that wasn't your intended argument, you might wish to be more explicit than a wall of links and "As if Apple users would care...".

> They do have the signing keys your iPhone will gladly accept to circumvent encryption, which is the argument.

Yes, and my argument is that the plumbing for either multiple release signing keys, one of which is never seen in the wild, or to avoid a second "iOS 13.1.5" or whatever with different build information showing up in various telemetry that would leak this existing, is very difficult to have built without far too many people who would spread rumors about it coming about, and even that rumor would be a problem.

So the most plausible thing, to me, would be that if such a capability exists, it's a "nuclear option" for whoever holds it to only use in a circumstance where it's so important they don't mind potentially never being able to use it again, whether that's because it's an exploit chain that will be fixed or because it's been coerced out of the target company and they will probably be compelled to fix it if it gets out.

Truly incredible.

You paid people how much money to pick a name that is going to get thrown out in the next 12 months as everyone keeps thinking you said Thunderbird.

None of those articles are inconsistent with the claim that Apple cares about security, though?

"We can be legally compelled to give up data we have" and "we thought letting people have custom kernel modules was a bigger threat" are not particularly incompatible with "we design things so we don't have keys to your data we can be compelled to give up" and valuing people's security. (I am not a fan of the latter, to be clear, but there are reasonable reasons you could argue for it.)

But yes, I would probably, at the moment, bet that if the NSA can sign a custom iOS build on consumer hardware, Apple doesn't know about how, both because that's a very hard secret to keep, and because you'd see a massive uptick in people avoiding Apple devices in governments that might be of interest to US intelligence if even a rumor of that got out.

This seems absurd from a company offering backups as a service.

Especially if they allow them restoring all your data onto a drive and shipping it to you, they pretty clearly should have enough information available to them to test restorations of data, and the number of times I've heard that failure mode ("oh, we didn't track deletions well enough, so we only found out we deleted it when you tried restoring"), plus them saying they have made improvements to avoid this exact failure mode in newer client versions, makes me think they should have enough reports to investigate it.

...which makes me wonder if they did, and decided they would go bankrupt if they told people how much data they lost, so they decided to bet on people not trying restores on a lot of the lost data.