2,331 karma · joined October 18, 2010
For example, an older couple whose kids have left could downsize, but often can’t afford it due to that generation trying to maximize ROI.
So, the system is broken even for folks who want a different home, and the incentive to fix it may be that flexibility for existing homeowners to get a better fit for themselves.
I believe this may be an intentional change to temporarily avoid a security issue, which otherwise hadn't been fixed yet: https://theevilbit.github.io/posts/cve-2022-32929/ (as shown in the blog post and embedded Twitter thread linked earlier)
> The issue is that an attacker can invoke the `AppleMobileBackup` utility and make a backup to a custom location. Thus completely bypassing the protected backup location.
The issue was "fixed" on the macOS side by updating the binary to not support this behavior, but the problem is that you can still swap in a binary from an older version of macOS to get around this.
So, presumably, the problem is blocked from the iOS side now until the issue is resolved from the iOS side to make the older macOS binaries not work with newer iOS. I think it's safe to assume there wasn't time to fix this fully (since it needs to behave differently depending on the version of macOS making the request to avoid making older Macs entirely incompatible despite the prompt) and therefore the fix is temporary, but it would be a shame if it was permanent.
A friend did it and left afterward for Australia because he realized he didn’t want to be middle-aged in Japan as a foreigner, and also regretted it in the end due to the tax liability.
Buyers can essentially destroy the item and return it claiming warehouse damage, and then Amazon won’t always take responsibility even if it was sent to FBA near perfect or new.
I was hoping it would be moved to later in the year, not moved online.
This is basic stuff.