Telaneo

Getting CRTs from yard sales is getting surprisingly hard if you're in the right (or wrong) part of the world. 1080p flat panels have been in common use for over 15 years by now. It shouldn't surprise you to see some for dirt cheap at yard sales.

The Sony KV-32FS120, a high-end set in 2004, had an MSRP of 600 USD.[1] (remember, HD hadn't really happened yet, so anything with that feature wasn't a normal consumer item until at least 2005 (unles you were in Japan)) 1080i basically didn't exist in 1997, unless you lived in Japan, where it had barely got of the ground. The modern day comparison is a 100 inch 8K OLED. Your median is so far off base I have a hard time we live in the same world.

[2] https://crtdatabase.com/crts/sony/sony-kv-32fs120

Did anyone think paper straws were significant? I've only ever heard people complain about or heard it talked about as what politicians/whoever could push through without major complaints, rather than anything that'd actually do anything.

Heck, the only thing it's probably effective at is tiring the general population with non-solutions that reduce their quality of life. People know it doesn't do anything, and yet they have to engage with it.

Going by the article, Asus clearly don't. Given the stories floating around about the others, I doubt they have it too, except maybe Lenovo on Thinkpads and the like, although they too aren't immune from problems that really should be caught in QC.

It's one of the reasons Microslop have been pushing Windows for ARM, only for them to discover that ARM doesn't actually solve this problem. It's less likely to cause problems just because there are less Windows ARM devices out there, with less variety and thus more consistency, but the underlying problem of drivers and other BS being able to block sleep and Windows not being able to handle it is unsolved. Heck, sleep working just fine on x86 Macbooks should have told them that.

Even worse is the fact that support for S3 sleep is going away, so if that did work for you, you'll be pushed over to using S0 sleep, which also doesn't actually solve this problem to any significant degree.

If work wants to be picky about what devices can access those things, but still want their employees to do so, they should provide devices for that. If they don't, well, then the employees get to not do work during non-work hours.

How many people bring their own laptop to work? (ignoring self-employed people and the like which this line of thinking really doesn't apply to) Phones should be treated the same way.

Personal devices shouldn't be used for work purposes to begin with. If work has security requirements regarding what phone and what condition it is in, they better be supplying their own phone to ensure those requirements are satisfied.

/s ?

I'm sure the vast majority of app developers are very much uninterested in leaving Apple's App Store if they have any interest in capturing an audience of any size, unless they themselves are a giant corp and have a Fortnite or similar on their hands.

However, the looming threat of that being possible, and Apple not being able to block it from happening, will hopefully prevent Apple from making the App Store experience worse than it needs to be, both from the user's perspective, and the publisher's perspective.

Surely it's possible to treat phones the same way as computers in corporate settings? Normal users aren't usually allowed to install whatever they want on their work PC, so why their work phone?

> Subject to orders 12 and 13, the first respondent must do all things necessary (including procuring any act of any related corporation) to ensure that users of iOS devices can discover, obtain and update iOS apps, including alternative app stores, via distribution channels other than the App Store (including via direct download and alternative app stores) provided those iOS apps have undergone an automated scan for genuine security and/or privacy reasons and been notarised by Apple or a suitably qualified third party (Alternative Distribution Channels), and that app developers can distribute and update such iOS apps to such users via Alternative Distribution Channels, including but not limited to providing access to all tools and APIs (including software development kits):

So notarisation is still on the table? I won't be surprised to see Apple using that for all the loophole its worth.

That is, unless that's already covered by the ruling and I just didn't see it while skimming. Maybe the Alternative Distribution Channels is that, although it doesn't seem to be defined beyond 'a suitably qualified third party', which I'm sure Apple would love to say is no-one.

Still, the rest of it is very nice. The altstores for Apple have seemed kind of useless to me just through either costing money to use or needing to connect to a PC every so often, or needing to perform some other stupid dance. If we can get the F-Droid of iOS and an option to just download and install an IPA if I want to, then I'll be pretty happy.

I'd say so. It sure looks, walks and smells like a government. They're often responsible for things that ought to be the local council's job, and have a tendency to enact rules which will lead to consequences if not followed (just being able to be fined by one, even if the rules are reasonable, sure does make one feel like a government). It's all on a smaller scale than the government-government, but that doesn't really make it a non-government to me.

Wherever there is no government, more government appears to fill the vacuum,

Heck, even roving bandits in the absence of any government proper are a government of a sort. Just a really bad one.

Simple™. Easy™.

I can get dogshit for free too. Doesn't mean I want it.

If HOAs are a good example of self-governance, I can only conclude that self-governance is bad.

At least Firefox will still have it, although with Mozilla being the way that it is, I wouldn't be surprised if they follow suit.

I feel the same way about this that I do about removing Flash support: it's good that we're moving on to better things, but that doesn't help if there aren't better things to move on to.

What's the simple goto for making web based games that kids can mess around with? It was Flash, and now it's nothing. How do you set up an RSS feed to not just blast raw XML at the user? Soon it won't be XSLT any more, but I don't see a good replacement (even more annoying is the fact that browsers used to have features to handle RSS feeds by themselves, and XSLT was used to sidestep that problem, but now there's no more side to step).

What's the liktlyhood of ~~a technical~~ any audience being 4 days behind on updates? (hint: very high)

At least 4 of those. EA no longer offers any 3rd party games on its own store, but it did.[1] Ubisoft did once upon a time.[2] Not sure if they still do.

Battle.net is still limited to Activision-Blizzard, with a sprinkling of other Microsoft IP following the buyout. Although that might change soon?[3]

[1] https://www.ea.com/ea-pc-third-party-titles-2022

[2] https://gamesbeat.com/ubisoft-welcomes-third-party-games-on-...

[3] https://www.gamedeveloper.com/business/cd-projekt-red-and-bl...

I functionally do use the same stationary for years. The only exception is paper, which I try to avoid using due to its real world limitaions. My desk doesn't change depending on my mood. It barely develops yearly, let alone daily.

It's funny how Steam has had like, what, 5 competitors in this space (Ubisoft whatever, Origin/EA whatever, Battle.net, GOG, Epic Games), and none have even got close to Steam marketshare or feature set.

Ubisoft and EA have more or less surrendered. Battle.net is distinct enough with a group of exclusives including WoW to keep going. GoG is kept alive by its one single USP, and its launcher isn't even relevant to that, so it's just there, not really doing anything. Epic is seemingly trying to compete against Steam, but seems blind to the reasons why people like Steam.

> In real life you don't use the same stationary for years.

That's honestly just because I can't reuse paper I've already written something on. That's a limitation of paper I'm glad the digital did away with.

I've used some pens for years. Once I found one I liked, I stuck with it.

I switched to Linux to get away from the UI churn. Things changing without my consent does not bring me joy, but it's not like you really have a choice if you run Windows (or a distro with a DE that does do the churn).

If --help even lists everything. man [whatever] might contain more options. And both may leave out critical information.

Just as your recovery codes already are. It's all just passwords with extra steps.

I don't know my TOTP secrets. They're far too long for me (or any reasonable human) to memorise them. The only way to use them is to have physical access to them (unless I post them publicly on the internet, which I don't).

My first factor is 'something I know'. That it my password to my password manager. My second factor is 'something I have'. That would be my 2FA codes/secrets. I keep backups of both. Someone getting access to my 2FA secrets is extremely unlikely short of someone breaking into my house and stealing my encrypted NAS or my second encrypted backup. That's not a threat I intend to counter with my threat model. On the other hand, getting locked out of an account is a threat I do intent to mitigate, and thus, not having backups is not a viable alternative for me.

> Microsoft, Apple, Adobe, Cisco, Steam to name a few.

I use normal TOTP with Microslop. Presumably you can opt into a worse version if you use their enterprise software, if you're evil or whatever.

The rest I presume fall into the bucket of 'wants to cause their users pain and suffering'. That's the normal modus operandi for Adobe and Cicso at least. The only one of those I use is Steam, and I haven't needed to log into Steam in over 2 years, since I'm just always logged in. Fair point though.

> Fair enough. I find TOTP to be a PITA.

I do too. Yet passkeys manage to be even more of a pain in the ass with ominous potential consequences on the horizon. If it was TOTP plus some phishing resistance without any actual downside, I'd have no beef. If it was TOTP but simpler, then there's be negative beef. There are however several clear and present downsides to passkeys. That just makes for a worse tradeoff (depending on your values) rather than a genuine improvement.

> Who's providing the ability to ban software?

The people who wrote the spec. If the spec didn't care about what software was being used to handle passkeys, they wouldn't have written in the ability for whatever you're authenticating to to know that.

The spec is bad and the people who wrote it should feel bad.

> In practice I'm aware of more 'lock in' behavior in the form of restricting which TOTP client is accepted than for Passkeys.

I've never seen this before. This reads like FUD to me. Every single site that I use TOTP with (40~ going by the number of secrets I have) didn't give a shit, and I don't see how they could, unless they use Super™ Special™ TOTP™ just because they're so special and wish pain and suffering onto their users. It's just a QR code you scan or a secret you manually type in, which then gives you some numbers you use later, and that's all it should be.

> Bitwarden also syncs TOTP. Given it's the same client, why push folks to opt for a provably weaker protocol with higher potential for user harm?

TOTP doesn't have a higher potential for user harm. If you use it with Bitwarden, the phishing resistance passkeys tout is something you already mostly get (you can still manually copy the code, which I believe to be a good thing, believe it or not).

Given how inconsistently passkeys are implemented and how it's more difficult to get at the actual data being used (unless you export them with Keepassxc (or Bitwarden?), the potential for fuckups is much higher with passkeys.

I'm yet to see someone get phished. It must happen, given that's how passkeys got started. But the far more common ways I've seen are sessions getting snatched and data leaks, neither of which passkeys protect against. It's a marginal benefit in exchange for so many downsides.

It's not FUD. It's just my opinion and a bad spec.

The ability to ban perfectly good software from being used is reducing user choice. It goes against those very ideals: possibilites and consensus. We should not adopt software paradigms that are counter to those.

TOTP is already 'good'. Passkeys are worse because of bullshit like this.

You can back up the TOTP secrets to add another layer of protection. I haven't needed to restore from backup yet, but I'm pretty confident that failure mode won't be a problem outside the immediate timeframe my phone happens to die.

The fact that it's even possible is a huge problem.

This describes most non-techy people I know who are 20~ years older than me (unless they're 40+ years older than me and only using a laptop to check their email).