danudey

> this doesn't get reasonably full access to the App Store then it's a no-go for me

From their page:

"Additional apps. HomeView supports compatible third-party audio and video apps from your iPhone for a familiar experience across devices"

This implies that Plexamp could be supported, and possibly Messenger and Snapchat calls, but it's too early to tell.

> My house has a bunch of spots on the wall where an old intercom system used to live: it'd obviously be a budget buster to buy a bunch of these to fit in those slots but even if you did, you'd need Apple to provide an intercom solution (a la the Watch's Walkie-Talkie?) or you're...out of luck.

Apple Home already provides this. It's not a full voice chat, but you can tap a thing and say something and it'll broadcast it to the rest of the house; in my case, that's two HomePods Mini, but it's easy to assume it will include this as well.

If you're just looking to say "Hey kids, dinner's ready" or "We have to leave in 15 minutes" to the entire house then that circumstance is handled already; if you want to have a back-and-forth conversation with someone in another room, though, it doesn't do that (yet?).

Let's please dispense with the "trust me bro" paranoia takes. Link to something that demonstrates your point or you're just making baseless accusations that discourage people from trusting actual privacy and security research.

I mean, if your privacy concern is 'silicon can be backdoored' then you can't trust any technology anywhere, ever.

Given that even an AppleTV uses less power at maximum usage than an XBox does when it's asleep, I feel as though the power usage is not going to be too much of an issue.

Could you not either bootstrap rust with lld or bootstrap rust with mold2?

IIRC if the evidence wasn't lawfully gathered (which it sounds like it was, tbh) then it wouldn't be a mistrial, it would be thrown out and then the prosecution wouldn't have any evidence of any crime.

Don't worry, Oracle is well on its way to junk bond status and when it gets there it won't be able to afford the interest on borrowing enough to let it do anything interesting or terrible.

Their goal is to create a system that's easy to run and manage even if you don't really know much about k8s - which I guess is a common thing, since k8s is a nightmare to manage directly until you learn everything about everything.

More importantly, they want to build an ecosystem around their ecosystem around k8s. They want people publishing their software to work on OpenShift (e.g. in the operator catalog), they have certification processes for software compatibility (e.g. CNI certification), and now that they've come as far as they have they're going after VMWare's lunch, madly scooping up every customer they can get their hands on to try to offer them a user-friendly kubevirt implementation to replace VMWare (and NSX).

If OpenShift was close to k8s then there wouldn't be enough differentiation between the two to make it worth the money so they're building out everything they think that execs and overworked infra teams will be willing to pay for to make k8s migration a workable option (rather than an internal migration project that stagnates and drags on for ten years).

OCP is just RHEL but for Kubernetes, and RHEL has done pretty well over the years all in all. RHEL is "just Linux", but it's "just Linux" with a bunch of RHEL-specific stuff in it and on top of it, and RHEL-specific policies around it, such that you can buy something from a software or hardware vendor that works with and is tested on RHEL and you know it'll work with your systems.

The goal is the same; company sells this software/solution, it runs on OpenShift v4.xx and up; you need RH's mesh and virt operators installed and configured, and then you can install our operator for our software and you're done. Now your whatever, database or CMS or whatever it is, just works. You don't have to customize the charts or define your own ingress gateway, it's all handled already if your system is set up properly. Then you get the meta-control panel that lets you see and manage all of your clusters and etc., so you can get a higher-level view, etc. etc.

They want vendor lock-in to an extent, but they've seen that what customers want isn't "Linux", it's a Linux distribution that gives them enterprise reliability (read: never getting new versions of stuff, only security patches) and compatibility guarantees from vendors. They're just trying to do the same thing with kubernetes. Will it work? Seems like it's going okay so far, I guess we'll see.

Worth mentioning that someone else in the comments converted their large library of JPEGs to JPEG XL for exactly this reason and only realized afterwards that they lost a ton of image metadata from the EXIF tags. This probably isn't what you would assume would happen for a bulk 'lossless conversion' so if you're going to do this then make sure you're validating the metadata too (if it matters to you).

Very confused by the article. Is memoization new to the eBPF world? Did the author only just learn about it and wanted to use it?

In reality, the article is about correctly caching a path:policy mapping while working within the limitations of eBPF and Linux filesystem semantics. If you read the article in that context rather than wondering 'what is new and interesting about memoization in eBPF?' it's a lot more interesting.

I probably would have titled this 'Calculating cache keys for filesystem paths in eBPF' or something, since that's the cool and interesting problem that was solved.

As someone who's used btrfs and zfs, btrfs today is still a pale imitation of what zfs was at launch. btrfs feels like people wanted to make a filesystem which had all the 'pretty neat' features of ZFS but without the tightly coupled management and benefits of ZFS (like volume management + RAID + encryption + compression all being managed through one tool).

btrfs ended up being basically a consumer version of a few of ZFS's most visible features - transparent compression, subvolumes, and copy-on-write - which then farms out the other most useful features - RAID + volume management + encryption - to the existing tooling. Makes sense for a smaller-scale project, no shade, but it definitely misses the mark if you've spent time on ZFS systems taking advantage of what ZFS has to offer (like recursive snapshots or vdevs).

I borrowed a dyson vacuum once from a neighbour. Despite using it to vacuum my apartment after already having used my own vacuum, it filled up almost instantly with stuff my personal vacuum left in the carpet.

My current vacuum is a V15, and I like it a lot. It was expensive (and a gift), but it's very effective, has a lot of attachments to make it easier to clean upholstery/the carpet/a computer/drawers/hardwood/the window frames/whatever, comes with a wall mount that the cable connects to so you can just put it in the mount and it charges. The one issue I had seems to be a relatively well-understood issue with the electronics, which resulted in me having to spend another $100+ on a new housing - the electronics + motor + LCD screen + etc., basically the whole 'vacuum' part of the vacuum. Given how well it's treated my so far, though, I'm not too miffed.

Our last vacuum (which we still have) was a Miele, and while it was also fantastic it was far more of a pain in the ass since it's a plug-in with a bag vs. a cordless canister. The quality is similar, I think the Dyson is a bit better, but I use it exclusively because it's far easier to go get it, vacuum up a spill, and put it back. I know that's more of a comparison between canister and bag vaccums, but the fact that they're around as effective despite the dyson being a canister is I think a point in its favor.

Whether all of their stuff is as good, or only the more expensive stuff, I can't say.

I bought a Dyson vacuum, or rather I was given one as a gift from my wife after she saw a joke twitter post about a man being happier about a new vacuum than the birth of his own kids. She gave it to me on Christmas Eve because I was about to vacuum the entire house with our old vacuum - which was also a fantastic vacuum, for the record.

My feedback:

1. It works great. I had to empty it several times because it was picking up so much more stuff than our existing vacuum did - mostly pet hair and the like.

2. It's the one with the little laser thing, which is a dumb little gimmick until you see it in action and then it's life-changing - if you're like me and find satisfaction in picking up every invisible crumb anywhere.

3. After a year and a bit, maybe less, it started misbehaving. It would suddenly turn off, then you'd have to let go of the trigger and pull it again; then it would work fine. Then it would happen a few times until it worked fine. Then it almost never worked fine. I kind of tolerated it for a while until I got fed up and googled the problem, and it was suggested to buy a new housing - the electronics plus the motor, basically the whole 'vacuum' part of the vacuum, which was only just over a hundred dollars direct from Dyson. Irritating to have to spend an extra hundred bucks to get my five hundred dollar vacuum working as expectred, but expected it to cost far more.

Would I recommend it? Not sure. It's very expensive, it works very well; it has a nice wall mount that charges it and which holds a small subset of the attachments it comes with. I'm glad I have it and I use it often.

Yes, it's plastic, but if it were, for example, steel or aluminium then it would be too heavy to use for any length of time. As it is, it feels very sturdy and has held up physically very well, but I'm obviously also not rough with it so there's no reason it would have any issues unless it were, in fact, cheaply or poorly made.

It supports a dark theme but then you can't see 90% of what it actually does because drop shadows on dark backgrounds just plain don't work.