I'm sorry but the keyboard is shit. Period. It is uncomfortable and so un-ergonomic that I may as well be using one of those laser projection keyboards and ramming my fingers on my desk.
The fact that it is so poorly engineered that a fragment of dust requires a several hundred dollar repair is just icing on the cake. The keyboard is the single most idiotically designed peripheral Apple has produced since their legendary hockey puck mouse.
I have an ethernet jack because I need to work from multiple VLANs.
I have a USB3 hub with an ergonomic keyboard, trackball and external drives.
I literally have every every port full on my 2015 MBP.
At least with the 2015 I still have *some* normal ports so I can plug in USB devices and my HDMI monitor.
If I used one of the newer MBPs, I would need multiple port replicators to cover all the stuff I plug in. And I would have to buy spares in case one failed or got forgotten somewhere.
How do you use your machine? I am guessing you are either in an Apple-centric shop where everything has been setup for you (AppleTVs on every TV/Projector, etc), or you don't do anything that requires connectivity to other devices.
Why are they still pushing that POS keyboard? Is it not bad enough that they can't make a mouse to save their lives, but now they have to ruin keyboards too?
Just to be clear, it isn't possible to agree on things when one side is specifically and explicitly going out of their way to be dicks.
I know that at least once, the Republican party had standing orders to vote against *anything* the Democrats wanted, no matter how good an idea it was.
How do you work with people who have standing orders to go against whatever you stand for, no matter what?
I'm trying to find a link to an article where the above was admitted, but I'm having trouble finding it cause this Kavanaugh nonsense is flooding the results.
It's not that hard to imagine POTUS doing the same kind of thing. Yet... We are regaled by this garbage journalist's implications, without a shred of actual evidence..
It's called extrapolation.
Based on his past behaviour, it is VERY hard to imagine Trump doing the responsible, sensible thing. Just because there is no explicit smoking gun IN THIS SPECIFIC CASE, is not a reason to dismiss the fact that he is not capable of spilling secrets. He's already done it on twitter. He's shoved both feet into his mouth so often that it's not even a question anymore.
That means even without specifics, the story is completely and entirely plausable.
My point is that if Trump used a secured phone at all times, then you could at least be reasonably sure that if there was a data breach, it wasn't caused by Trump's end.
Trump cannot be trusted to know what he ejects from his mouth is sensitive or not. This is established fact. The 2nd best option (the best being kicking Trump out), is to secure everything on his side so that at least that part is covered.
If the other side isn't secured, then you're no worse off than you were before. If Trump's side isn't secured, then you all but guarantee that *all* his communication is unsecured.
As far as the "Fake News" things go, Trump's view of what "Fake News" is has not even the slightest bearing on reality. To Trump, "Fake News" is any news that doesn't lick his ass in a tight swirly pattern. So using that as a basis for your own opinion is worse than wrong. Furthermore, Trump is a pathological liar. He will, and demonstrably has, lied about all sorts of things. What comes out of his mouth absolutely cannot be trusted.
NYT on the other hand, but many different measures, is deomonstrably FAR more trustworthy than Trump is. They may not be 100% correct all the time (no one is), but NYT is much more deserving the benefit of the doubt than Trump ever will be.
You do realize that Trump is about as far from being a computer professional as he can get?
That means you *have* to secure everything because Trump *cannot* be trusted to do the right thing. In fact, based on his temperament you can be reasonably sure that he will intentionally do the wrong thing, just to spite you.
So you're basically saying it's better for ALL his conversations to be insecure than some of them? Since the other person MAY be a weak link, we may as well guarantee that the *President of the United States* should be the weak link?
They do very detailed content-based analysis and are responsible for what is apparently a now very well cited graph. (https://www.adfontesmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Media-Bias-Chart_4.0_8_28_2018-min.jpg)
It's interesting cause they go into depth regarding their methodology and it seems pretty solid.
Incidentally, NYT is categorized as "slightly left leaning" and "factual".
How this got modded insightful I can't even guess. Of *course* it will let you in. So will *any* consumer grade phone. It's called "phone tapping". Whether it's on the phone itself, a hijack on the carrier's network, or using a picocell to perform a MITM attack, it's actually very easy for anyone who cares enough to do so.
Law enforcement do it all the time, for pete's sake.
There's nothing to encrypt if data isn't being sent. Even if you can't see the data itself, you can still tell that data is going out, and where it is going to.
I cannot believe a sane person would actually be against this. Is there something wrong with you? Do you like not getting security updates? Do you want your phone hijacked?
Google Play is the one thing keeping malware from being worse than it already is. Unless there's an alternative app store that certifies that it thoroughly tests submitted apps, then I will grant them about as much trust as I would for free candy from Bill Cosby.
IMO Google hasn't gone nearly far enough. The rule should be simple. Security updates for at least 3 years for any android device you release to the public. Period. Don't like it? You are forbidden from using the Android trademark. Very simple.
Heaven forbid Google used their power for the public good.
2 years for popular phones? What defines a "popular" phone?
How about 3 years for ALL phones? You want to use android? Then provide f__king updates. Don't want to provide updates? Then GTFO.
Oh who am I joking? The consumer is the product. They care more about looking like they're doing something useful than actually doing something useful.
While we obviously can't know for sure, there so far hasn't been any evidence that Apple does this. They do collect data with respect to services that they specifically provide that requires them to use such data (eg: Siri, maps, etc) but I've read past reports from people who have wiresharked the traffic coming out of their iDevices and Apple was true to their word. iDevices did not send unnecessary data to Apple.
Nor is there evidence that they buy up data from elsewhere like Facebook or Google does.
They have positioned themselves as data privacy champions. If they were exposed as data miners of the likes of Google or Facebook, don't you think that exposing that hypocrisy would be massive news? I know I haven't seen any such news yet. Please feel free to link such news stories in case I simply missed them.
I would mod you +1 informative if I could. Thank you for that! I've seen Aurora but haven't had time to really explore it. And I didn't know they had expanded that to Postgres too.
I can absolutely understand wanting to move off Oracle. But why would they re-invent the wheel and write their own database? At least, that's what it sounds like they're doing based on the way the article was phrased.
Wouldn't it have been better to just switch to Postgres and use the oracle compatibility layer if they needed things like PL/SQL support?
It's a microserver that does the majority of the grunt-work for you. Software updates, backups, etc. You don't need to manage the updates yourself. You don't need source your own offsite backup accounts.
Basically you get a well-configured groupware server without the grind.
That looks pretty good, but it's too basic for my needs.
I want a full groupware suite where I can also sync my calendar and contacts as well.
Currently the only packages I've been able to find that fit the bill are fremium systems like Axigen or Zimbra, and you have to pay substantial money for 'advanced' features like proper backups, etc.
So I end up just rolling my own process instead... which is now yet another thing I have to maintain.
That's the problem. I already do this for my day job. I don't like having to deal with it during my off hours too.
I also currently have a mail server running as well, and yes, day to day it's not THAT bad.
Until something completely unexpected happens and I have to drop everything in order to fix an unexpected calamity.
Or when you discover than your emails are getting turfed because a recipient is doing a reverse ip lookup and trying to get your ISP to configure that is a nightmare.
Or one of the billion other edges cases that you are now responsible for taking care of.
Saying that that's not bad because you've dealt with worse is like saying, "Having sex with a cactus isn't bad because having sex with a chainsaw is so much worse!" While technically true, it's still very far from an enjoyable experience.
I've been looking for options myself for a while now cause I'm fed up running my own server. If this Helm thing turns out to be as good as they claim (I'll wait for an exhaustive reviews first.) then I may well take the plunge.
I beg to differ. Microsoft is still very much a monopoly. There is no way they'd be able to get away with the bullshit they're pulling WRT Windows 10 if they weren't a monopoly.
The only place they are noticeably losing on is anything internet infrastructure related. And that's cause they never really gained much of a foothold to begin with.
Are you kidding? Have you ever tried maintaining your own email server? $500 is dirt cheap compared to maintaining your own.
Maybe it was fine in the old days where all you did was install linux and make sure sendmail/postfix was running, but in todays environment maintaining an email server is a bloody nightmare. DMARC records, SPF records, reverse IP mapping... SSL certificates and security rules... And lets not get into arbitrary nonsense rules that some companies set in a misguided attempt at combating spam.
Even when you know what you're doing, it's a PITA. If you're not fully versed in all the intricacies of the various RFPs and SMTP servers in general, then you're going to have a particularly nasty time.
Based on what I know, I can't help thinking that they might be biting off more than they can chew. But if they actually do pull it off, then they are going to make a completely justified mint.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sorry but the keyboard is shit. Period. It is uncomfortable and so un-ergonomic that I may as well be using one of those laser projection keyboards and ramming my fingers on my desk.
The fact that it is so poorly engineered that a fragment of dust requires a several hundred dollar repair is just icing on the cake. The keyboard is the single most idiotically designed peripheral Apple has produced since their legendary hockey puck mouse.
I have two monitors connected to my macbook.
I have an ethernet jack because I need to work from multiple VLANs.
I have a USB3 hub with an ergonomic keyboard, trackball and external drives.
I literally have every every port full on my 2015 MBP.
At least with the 2015 I still have *some* normal ports so I can plug in USB devices and my HDMI monitor.
If I used one of the newer MBPs, I would need multiple port replicators to cover all the stuff I plug in. And I would have to buy spares in case one failed or got forgotten somewhere.
How do you use your machine? I am guessing you are either in an Apple-centric shop where everything has been setup for you (AppleTVs on every TV/Projector, etc), or you don't do anything that requires connectivity to other devices.
Why are they still pushing that POS keyboard? Is it not bad enough that they can't make a mouse to save their lives, but now they have to ruin keyboards too?
That thing is an ergonomic nightmare.
Ever since Trump declared Canada to be a threat to national security, it's really hard to take these declarations seriously.
I wonder what deal is he trying to wrangle from the company. Maybe he needs more investments in his golf courses and hotels.
Just to be clear, it isn't possible to agree on things when one side is specifically and explicitly going out of their way to be dicks.
I know that at least once, the Republican party had standing orders to vote against *anything* the Democrats wanted, no matter how good an idea it was.
How do you work with people who have standing orders to go against whatever you stand for, no matter what?
I'm trying to find a link to an article where the above was admitted, but I'm having trouble finding it cause this Kavanaugh nonsense is flooding the results.
It's not that hard to imagine POTUS doing the same kind of thing. Yet... We are regaled by this garbage journalist's implications, without a shred of actual evidence..
It's called extrapolation.
Based on his past behaviour, it is VERY hard to imagine Trump doing the responsible, sensible thing. Just because there is no explicit smoking gun IN THIS SPECIFIC CASE, is not a reason to dismiss the fact that he is not capable of spilling secrets. He's already done it on twitter. He's shoved both feet into his mouth so often that it's not even a question anymore.
That means even without specifics, the story is completely and entirely plausable.
*facepalm*. Of course I know that.
My point is that if Trump used a secured phone at all times, then you could at least be reasonably sure that if there was a data breach, it wasn't caused by Trump's end.
Trump cannot be trusted to know what he ejects from his mouth is sensitive or not. This is established fact. The 2nd best option (the best being kicking Trump out), is to secure everything on his side so that at least that part is covered.
If the other side isn't secured, then you're no worse off than you were before. If Trump's side isn't secured, then you all but guarantee that *all* his communication is unsecured.
As far as the "Fake News" things go, Trump's view of what "Fake News" is has not even the slightest bearing on reality. To Trump, "Fake News" is any news that doesn't lick his ass in a tight swirly pattern. So using that as a basis for your own opinion is worse than wrong. Furthermore, Trump is a pathological liar. He will, and demonstrably has, lied about all sorts of things. What comes out of his mouth absolutely cannot be trusted.
NYT on the other hand, but many different measures, is deomonstrably FAR more trustworthy than Trump is. They may not be 100% correct all the time (no one is), but NYT is much more deserving the benefit of the doubt than Trump ever will be.
In 20 years of being a computer professional
You do realize that Trump is about as far from being a computer professional as he can get?
That means you *have* to secure everything because Trump *cannot* be trusted to do the right thing. In fact, based on his temperament you can be reasonably sure that he will intentionally do the wrong thing, just to spite you.
Why wouldn't you rather he use a hardened phone at all times, so that it's not even a question/concern?
So you're basically saying it's better for ALL his conversations to be insecure than some of them? Since the other person MAY be a weak link, we may as well guarantee that the *President of the United States* should be the weak link?
FYI, this discussion made me curious to see if there are anything like 'rankings' for news sources, and I came upon this very interesting site:
https://www.adfontesmedia.com/
They do very detailed content-based analysis and are responsible for what is apparently a now very well cited graph. (https://www.adfontesmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Media-Bias-Chart_4.0_8_28_2018-min.jpg)
It's interesting cause they go into depth regarding their methodology and it seems pretty solid.
Incidentally, NYT is categorized as "slightly left leaning" and "factual".
How this got modded insightful I can't even guess. Of *course* it will let you in. So will *any* consumer grade phone. It's called "phone tapping". Whether it's on the phone itself, a hijack on the carrier's network, or using a picocell to perform a MITM attack, it's actually very easy for anyone who cares enough to do so.
Law enforcement do it all the time, for pete's sake.
What makes you say that? Do you have specific evidence or is this one of those, "They don't say what I want to hear so they're not credible" things?
There's nothing to encrypt if data isn't being sent. Even if you can't see the data itself, you can still tell that data is going out, and where it is going to.
I cannot believe a sane person would actually be against this. Is there something wrong with you? Do you like not getting security updates? Do you want your phone hijacked?
Google Play is the one thing keeping malware from being worse than it already is. Unless there's an alternative app store that certifies that it thoroughly tests submitted apps, then I will grant them about as much trust as I would for free candy from Bill Cosby.
IMO Google hasn't gone nearly far enough. The rule should be simple. Security updates for at least 3 years for any android device you release to the public. Period. Don't like it? You are forbidden from using the Android trademark. Very simple.
Heaven forbid Google used their power for the public good.
2 years for popular phones? What defines a "popular" phone?
How about 3 years for ALL phones? You want to use android? Then provide f__king updates. Don't want to provide updates? Then GTFO.
Oh who am I joking? The consumer is the product. They care more about looking like they're doing something useful than actually doing something useful.
While we obviously can't know for sure, there so far hasn't been any evidence that Apple does this. They do collect data with respect to services that they specifically provide that requires them to use such data (eg: Siri, maps, etc) but I've read past reports from people who have wiresharked the traffic coming out of their iDevices and Apple was true to their word. iDevices did not send unnecessary data to Apple.
Nor is there evidence that they buy up data from elsewhere like Facebook or Google does.
They have positioned themselves as data privacy champions. If they were exposed as data miners of the likes of Google or Facebook, don't you think that exposing that hypocrisy would be massive news? I know I haven't seen any such news yet. Please feel free to link such news stories in case I simply missed them.
I would mod you +1 informative if I could. Thank you for that! I've seen Aurora but haven't had time to really explore it. And I didn't know they had expanded that to Postgres too.
That phrase confused me.
I can absolutely understand wanting to move off Oracle. But why would they re-invent the wheel and write their own database? At least, that's what it sounds like they're doing based on the way the article was phrased.
Wouldn't it have been better to just switch to Postgres and use the oracle compatibility layer if they needed things like PL/SQL support?
Ilsa
Apparently we need a +1 Ominous moderation.
It's a microserver that does the majority of the grunt-work for you. Software updates, backups, etc. You don't need to manage the updates yourself. You don't need source your own offsite backup accounts.
Basically you get a well-configured groupware server without the grind.
That looks pretty good, but it's too basic for my needs.
I want a full groupware suite where I can also sync my calendar and contacts as well.
Currently the only packages I've been able to find that fit the bill are fremium systems like Axigen or Zimbra, and you have to pay substantial money for 'advanced' features like proper backups, etc.
So I end up just rolling my own process instead... which is now yet another thing I have to maintain.
That's the problem. I already do this for my day job. I don't like having to deal with it during my off hours too.
I also currently have a mail server running as well, and yes, day to day it's not THAT bad.
Until something completely unexpected happens and I have to drop everything in order to fix an unexpected calamity.
Or when you discover than your emails are getting turfed because a recipient is doing a reverse ip lookup and trying to get your ISP to configure that is a nightmare.
Or one of the billion other edges cases that you are now responsible for taking care of.
Saying that that's not bad because you've dealt with worse is like saying, "Having sex with a cactus isn't bad because having sex with a chainsaw is so much worse!" While technically true, it's still very far from an enjoyable experience.
I've been looking for options myself for a while now cause I'm fed up running my own server. If this Helm thing turns out to be as good as they claim (I'll wait for an exhaustive reviews first.) then I may well take the plunge.
I beg to differ. Microsoft is still very much a monopoly. There is no way they'd be able to get away with the bullshit they're pulling WRT Windows 10 if they weren't a monopoly.
The only place they are noticeably losing on is anything internet infrastructure related. And that's cause they never really gained much of a foothold to begin with.
Are you kidding? Have you ever tried maintaining your own email server? $500 is dirt cheap compared to maintaining your own.
Maybe it was fine in the old days where all you did was install linux and make sure sendmail/postfix was running, but in todays environment maintaining an email server is a bloody nightmare. DMARC records, SPF records, reverse IP mapping... SSL certificates and security rules... And lets not get into arbitrary nonsense rules that some companies set in a misguided attempt at combating spam.
Even when you know what you're doing, it's a PITA. If you're not fully versed in all the intricacies of the various RFPs and SMTP servers in general, then you're going to have a particularly nasty time.
Based on what I know, I can't help thinking that they might be biting off more than they can chew. But if they actually do pull it off, then they are going to make a completely justified mint.