xmodem

Is this process supposed to be less environmentally damaging than sending a device to landfill?

I have one I got from AliExpress, along with a stand to bring it up to a natural height. It's a great travel monitor and also occasionally useful around the house.

Previously I have travelled with a 'normal' monitor in a suitcase and had it destroyed by baggage handlers.

Come on man, The Pi 4 has almost all of those.

Besides, GP was pointing out that it feels like the price has gone up. I was pointing out that one reason it feels that way is because it has. No-one is arguing you don't get something for that money.

There is a whole market now of portable monitors that are intended to be used as a secondary laptop monitor when travelling, or as a bigger monitor for a switch or steam deck.

I've been toying the idea of replacing my aging macbook with one + an M4 mac mini - the situations where I need to use the computer on battery are relatively rare, and it'd be substantially cheaper.

The MSRP has gone up, though - the 1GB Pi 4 was introduced at $35. The cheapest Pi 5 is $50 (albeit with 2x the RAM).

Secondarily, mini-PCs are much more readily available at better prices now, which makes the Pi look more expensive in comparison.

Yeah, so I guess there's no point in picking any of the low hanging fruit to make it more secure.

Can you point to an assessment by a meta fact-checker that you disagree with?

Personally I see the value in exploring the limits of what systems are capable of, and exploring ways to use them outside of the parameters for which they were designed.

I would also generally like to avoid being on-call for a system that is being pushed to its limits or used outside the parameters it was designed for.

I am very curious to hear if anyone is shipping cosmopolitan-libc/Actually-portable-executable binaries, either internally or for consumption by end users. I would love to hear more about the experience!

What you can do, is curate who you follow / block so that you mostly don't see that. TBF you could do the same thing on X/Twitter to an extent but the platform has an incentive to circumvent your preferences.

Perhaps the standard is flawed and needs to be updated.

Switching to mastodon has been such a breath of fresh air. No algo-driven feed manipulating me to constantly check in means that I have a much healthier relationship with it. If I'm, say, on the metro I can use it to kill time for 5 minutes... and then put it down, and I don't feel compelled to pick it up.

One thing to consider is that cheaper/less common the TLD, the lower the spam reputation.

Also, check the renewal price - some of those newer TLDs have much higher fees for renewal than initial registration.

Right. So the unlock cost is now the cost of a burner SIM at the convenience store, and a bunch of hassle.

It's unfortunate that we even have to have this discussion, but it doesn't read that way to me. The text is not quite...homogenous enough to have come from an LLM IMO.

How do they uniquely identify individual end users? In other words, is anything stopping me from creating a new account for each device I want to unlock?

> Even though an old work like that is in the public domain, if it was played as a recording, whoever owns the rights to the recording still has a claim to copyright.

I am aware of that. In this case it was played from sheet music by a professional organist.

> The modifications to the sheet music could grant the person who sold the book a copyright.

Do you have a citation for this?

> According to YouTube, about 6 percent of removals from July to December 2023 were abusive, along with 10 times more attempted abusive removals

I uploaded the recording of my father's funeral to youtube, to share as an unlisted video. It attracted two copyright claims - for hymns written in the 18th century.

These were claims - not takedown requests - but I didn't think it was appropriate to share a link to the family that was unable to attend in person that would serve them ads. So I instead made the video private and shared it a different way.

But if I don't contest the claims, how can youtube possibly count them as abusive?

> If you do use asymmetric cryptography, always use Ed25519

What about secp256k1 / ES256K?

The incident that lead to this occurred 8 years ago, and the incidents you cite happened much more recently. I have no idea if any enforcement action is ongoing in those cases, but perhaps you should consider checking before posting an angry comment, or you could instead direct your ire towards why the process is so slow.

There are a number of fair criticisms of this project in this thread. Criticising the grammar of a non-native english speaker is not one of them.

'Never' is a bit strong. It depends a lot on what you're using the email address for. And it's probably safe to trust gmail addresses coming from google, for instance.

You're still only talking about a 3% difference. Outside the margin of error for a properly-controlled test - which I don't think this is - to be sure. But small enough that if I went into the BIOS of your PC while you weren't looking and down-clocked the RAM to achieve the same effect you wouldn't notice unless you ran a benchmark.

That's far from the only number that looks weird. If this site is legit - a point I'm not conceding - it could be that these numbers are the average of some large number of systems, and the tests are not properly controlled for any of the other factors that might affect performance. Amount of memory, memory speed, single vs dual channel, overclocking, CPU cooler, even ambient temperature could all be having an impact on the score, and certain types of CPU could be more likely to be biased in a particular direction.

It's also possible for some of the CPUs that their sample size is really small - so one or two overclocked or hotboxed systems could completely throw off the result.

> he believes in regard to dating stock options specifically, the CFO (Michelle) did not intend to break the law or know that she broke the law.

I do not doubt that she did not intend to break the law. But it sounds like she did not exercise sufficient due diligence, just assuming it was okay because PWC said so and no-one in law enforcement had noticed, yet.

> Therefore, implement conservative governance practices and stick to them." Unfortunately, the actual event he's citing isn't an ideal instance to illustrate...

I think it's a great illustration - the author's company was unaffected, because their governance practices successfully prevented them from engaging in illegal behaviour! Thats great for the company, its investors, its board, etc.

> IMHO, it kept going and got excessive, ultimately going too far in some cases fueled by 'tough on corporations' political grandstanding.

Can you cite some specific laws that you think are too easy to run afoul of by accident? Some laws specifically cite intent as a requirement for them to have been violated, but many do not, and that's never seen as a problem for laws that affect non-white-collar defendants.

This is a good piece, but I want to quibble with some of the conclusions.

> The whole thing was a case of the old saying: “When the paddy wagon pulls up to the house of ill repute, it doesn’t matter what you are doing. Everybody goes to jail.”

How does this apply? Sounds like the opposite - those who had not engaged in the illegal practices were unaffected.

> Once the SEC decided that most technology company stock option procedures were not as desired, the jail sentences were handed out arbitrarily.

That's just not how it works, at least not for white-collar defendants who can afford a proper defence.

There's also something to be said about this story being followed immediately by a pitch to sign up for a16z's crypto newsletter....

Hetzner has been an established player in Europe for a long time. It seems plausible that they have enough customers who use small amounts of bandwidth to subsidise the heavier users.

Considering switching costs, if they enter the US market with better pricing than established players, it stands to reason that the customers that would be most enticed to move will be the heavier users.

I think on-package labelling is a good approach. You could also make the retailer liable for a lack of updates - just as they typically already are with defective products in most jurisdictions.

ATP FM 383 - Demand paged outrage - https://atp.fm/383 starting around 1:12:20

Marco Arment: "if there is a compatibility layer, I wouldn't actually expect one, it'd be too slow and too crappy".... "anything related to x86 I think is not supported at all".

Casey Liss: (talking about a compatibility layer) "...I want it to be there, but I don't think it'll be there, especially since Apple seems to be on their high horse about how mighty and powerful they are these days"

Siracusa goes the other way - predicting that there will be a compatibility layer, mostly based on there being one the last two times. Then, incorrectly in my view, predicts it'll be worse than their previous attempts.

I'm sure I remember other commentators from around the time saying similar things, but I can't find them.

> Unlike the PPC and x86 transitions?

Yes.

> What was the rationale for such speculation?

IIRC, primarily they theorised that Apple would take the view that applications would be ported quickly enough there wouldn't be a need for one. I will try and dig some of them up but searching old videos and podcasts is painful.

The 5 year clock should start from the last time a consumer purchased the product new, though. I can't find anything concrete but some poking around on wayback machine indicates it was likely discontinued late 2018. Which probably still means they are in the clear in this instance even if you assume it takes a year for the inventory in the channel to sell through.