On the other extreme, 24/7 operations have redundancy.

A friend of mine explained that being an Emergency Medicine physician is a great job for work life balance, despite the fact that he often has to work ridiculous shifts, because he never has to take any work home with him. An Emergency Room is a 24/7 operation, so whenever he’s at home, some other doctor is responsible for whatever happens. So he gets to relax and never think about work when he’s not at work and not on call.

This is wrong, because you’re talking about disability insurance in a comment thread about disability discrimination.

Disability is very broadly defined for the purpose of disability discrimination laws, which is the context of this comment chain.

Disability is defined specific to a person’s work skills for the purpose of long term disability insurance (like the US’s federally administered Social Security disability insurance). Depending on the program/insurance type, it might require that you can’t hold down any meaningful job, caused by a medical condition that lasts longer than a year.

For things like short term disability, the disability is defined specific to that person’s preexisting job. Someone who gets an Achilles surgery that prevents them from operating the pedals of a motor vehicle for a few weeks would be “disabled” for the purpose of short term disability insurance if they’re a truck driver, and might not even be disabled if their day job is something like being a telemarketer who sits at a desk for their job.

Nah, that’s just anticipating customer rage. When I worked in restaurants I learned very early on that it’s better to put things in a smaller container, and put the overflow into a separate container, rather than try to give them a little extra in the next size container that doesn’t get filled up.

It’s the meme with the kid failing to understand that the amount doesn’t change just because the container changes. Only with angry adults who want their money back.

Oh I actually know this one. Mostly historical accident and path dependence.

In medieval England, kings wanted to make sure that taxes and fines to the crown were properly paid, so they had their own officials in each county, who reported to the King rather than to any local officials. Sheriffs were responsible for tax collection, law enforcement (both arresting people before they could be tried and carrying out the rulings of the court). But they’d have to wait for the king’s courts to actually come to town and hold trials and what not, so in the meantime the king’s financial interests weren’t necessarily aligned with the sheriff’s.

So coroners were appointed to watch over county matters and represent the king’s financial interests whenever the courts came to town.

When someone was convicted of a capital offense, their property escheated to the crown. That was an important source of revenue for the crown, so coroners would determine whether a dead body was the result of a crime or not, in order to make sure the crown wasn’t missing out on some convict money.

Both the Sheriff and coroner positions survived the transition into American governance, but independence and democratic reforms meant that these previously crown-appointed positions needed to become elected positions. Most states kept Sheriffs and Coroners as county officials, and preserved some of their traditional roles and duties. Many coroners offices were renamed to “medical examiner” but basically still preserved the role of keeping stats on deaths. And without appointment by the crown, most states just chose to make these elected positions.

hyper intense color perception

So shouldn’t your perception of people’s subtle/muted aurora pictures also be hyper intense, making those muted colors more accurate?

It boils down to this: the ad was a visually detailed and drawn out destruction of things some people like and are not easily replaced. These are physical objects that people genuinely have emotional attachments to. So it’s musicians and photographers who probably had the strongest visceral response: the type of people who kept obsolete devices past their obsolescence because that was the physical artifact of the thing they learned their craft on.

I know software developers who would’ve had the same visceral reaction to a Commodore 64 or Apple II or NES being slowly destroyed. Or even other gadgets that people loved, from a Walkman to an iPod to a Tamagotchi to original iPhone.

It’s not like the scene from Office Space where there’s visceral disgust for the thing being destroyed, but precisely the opposite emotions involved.

Some image and video processing workflows can make use of them today, and today’s announced video software features seem to be a roadmap for how iPads could be used in more computationally intensive workflows: editing, re-encoding, and sharing video between devices or to specific apps.

Some AI inference tasks could theoretically make heavier use of the CPUs, too.

as doing weird stuff is kinda their thing

Their corporate culture of doing weird stuff is an extension of their corporate culture of not trying to compete on cutting edge tech. Nintendo’s hardware has always been a generation behind in actual performance, so they focus on making that stuff fun rather than competing on realism/performance.

Their biggest flop was when they strayed from that principle and released a VR headset 1995.

None of what I’m saying is unique to the mechanics of open source. It’s just that the open source ecosystem as it currently exists today has different attack surfaces than a closed source ecosystem.

Governance models for a project are a very reasonable thing to consider when deciding whether to use a dependency for your application or library.

At a certain point, though, that’s outsourced to trust whoever someone else trusts. When I trust a specific distro (because I’m certainly not rolling my own distro), I’m trusting how they maintain their repos, as well as which packages they include by default. Then, each of those packages has dependencies, which in turn have dependencies. The nature of this kind of trust is that we select people one or two levels deep, and assume that they have vetted the dependencies another one or two levels, all the way down. XZ did something malicious with systemd, which opened a vulnerability in sshd, as compiled for certain distros.

You’re assuming that 100% of the source code used in a closed source project was developed by that company and according to the company’s governance model, which you assume is a good one.

Not at all. I’m very aware that some prior hacks by very sophisticated, probably state sponsored attackers have abused the chain of trust in proprietary software dependencies. Stuxnet relied on stolen private keys trusted by Windows for signing hardware drivers. The Solarwinds hack relied on compromising plugins trusted by Microsoft 365.

But my broader point is that there are simply more independent actors in the open source ecosystem. If a vulnerability takes the form of the weakest link, where compromising any one of the many independent links is enough to gain access, that broadly distributed ecosystem is more vulnerable. If a vulnerability requires chaining different things together so that multiple parts of the ecosystem are compromised, then distributing decisionmaking makes the ecosystem more robust. That’s the tradeoff I’m describing, and making things spread too thin introduces the type of vulnerability that I’m describing.

In the broader context of that thread, I’m inclined to agree with you: The circumstances by which this particular vulnerability was discovered shows that it took a decent amount of luck to catch it, and one can easily imagine a set of circumstances where this vulnerability would’ve slipped by the formal review processes that are applied to updates in these types of packages. And while it would be nice if the billion-dollar-companies that rely on certain packages would provide financial support for the open source projects they use, the question remains on how we should handle it when those corporations don’t. Do we front it ourselves, or just live with the knowledge that our security posture isn’t optimized for safety, because nobody will pay for that improvement?

100%.

In many ways, distributed open source software gives more social attack surfaces, because the system itself is designed to be distributed where a lot of people each handle a different responsibility. Almost every open source license includes an explicit disclaimer of a warranty, with some language that says something like this:

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED “AS IS”, WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT.

Well, bring together enough dependencies, and you’ll see that certain widely distributed software packages depend on the trust of dozens, if not hundreds, of independent maintainers.

This particular xz vulnerability seems to have affected systemd and sshd, using what was a socially engineered attack on a weak point in the entire dependency chain. And this particular type of social engineering (maintainer burnout, looking for a volunteer to take over) seems to fit more directly into open source culture than closed source/corporate development culture.

In the closed source world, there might be fewer places to probe for a weak link (socially or technically), which makes certain types of attacks more difficult. In other words, it might truly be the case that closed source software is less vulnerable to certain types of attacks, even if detection/audit/mitigation of those types of attacks is harder for closed source.

It’s a tradeoff, not a free lunch. I still generally trust open source stuff more, but let’s not pretend it’s literally better in every way.

There are issues with Macs and multiple monitors, but one thing they do great is that they can easily support multiple monitors with different dpi settings and refresh rates (including variable refresh rates), which turns into a big pain in the ass to get right in Linux.

The meaning of words is consensus-based. If you want to make the point you’re making, you probably should avoid making up your own definition of “light truck.”

Also, I don’t think this is a lift package. I think this is literally the factory specs.

There are quite a few classifications of trucks. In the U.S.:

Class 1: 0 - 6000 lbs
Class 2: 6,001 - 10,000 lbs
Class 3: 10,001 - 14,000 lbs
Class 4: 14,001 - 16,000 lbs
Class 5: 16,001 - 19,500 lbs
Class 6: 19,501 - 26,000 lbs
Class 7: 26,001 - 33,000 lbs
Class 8: Over 33,000 lbs

Classes 1 through 2 are considered “light” truck, 3/ through 6 is “medium,” and 7 and 8 are “heavy.”

Classes 7 and 8 require a commercial driver’s license.

Generally, Class 3 starts to have 4 wheels on the back axle, and Class 6 generally starts having multiple axles on the back. At a certain point, you’re up to 18 wheels on a tractor and trailer.

OP’s picture is probably of a Class 2 truck, while you’re thinking of Class 1 trucks.

But that’s exactly why last year’s 14 Pro came under so much criticism for its slow wired connection: the phone itself supported capturing high resolution, high framerate, high bitrate ProRes video, but didn’t have a way of quickly transferring directly over a cable.

But also, even regular photos and video can take up a big chunk of space, and having a non-cloud option for practically backing up the contents is helpful.

No, they tend to use last year’s Pro chip in this year’s base model. The A16 only supported USB 2.0 speeds last year in the iPhone 14 Pro model (despite the iPads showing us that Lightning does support USB 3 speeds), and it’s what’s in this year’s iPhone 15 base model.

The A17 supports higher speed through the USB Bus, so there’s no reason to hold that back for next year’s base model.

Yeah but the punchline literally was aged out of existence 10 years ago, when Apple stopped charging for OS (upgrade or otherwise).

People usually talk about “heat pumps” when they’re talking about using those systems to heat homes (and sometimes heating water), not cool homes. When they talk about the devices that cool homes, they generally just call it AC (even if it is technically a heat pump).

We as a country use far, far more energy heating homes than cooling homes.

USB-A to USB-C limits charging power to 12W. The iPhone 15 accepts up to 27W from supported USB-C to USB-C cables and chargers.

The iPhone 15’s system will use two lenses and two sensors. It hasn’t been launched on the software side, but is expected in the next few months using the existing hardware.

And it doesn’t need to be an eye length apart: the parallax between two lenses can create an accurate 3D image. Apple’s AR/VR system will also give a way to view/share the actual captured video, assuming it gets some level of adoption.