Right, I suppose I mean "getting more people to think about why a few of these bookmarked for your favorite topics, especially tied to a trustworthy person, is a million times better than just hitting up Google."
Or, perhaps, a "a better Google should just take you to these."
This comes to solve the problem of the terrible UX in the most widespread git service. I won't dare to try to convince my whole team, or company, to migrate to GitLab, but this can be easily adopted.
Explicitly promotional push isn't allowed on iPhone to begin with. Only exception is if the user enables it via some setting inside your app, separate from the regular permission dialog, which is really unlikely.
Of course you can just pass off promotional stuff as not promotional, but same on Android, and you have to be sly about it.
If ICANN-approved root.zone and ICANN-approved registries are the only options.
As an experiment I created own registry, not shared with anyone. For many years I have run own root server, i.e., I serve own custom root.zone to all computers I own. I have a search experiment that uses a custom TLD that embeds a well-known classification system. The TLD portion of the domainname can catgorise any product or service on Earth.
ICANN TLDs are vague, ambiguous, sometimes even deceptive.
This sounds like a wonderful project, do you have any documentation of the process you wouldn't mind sharing? Would love to play around with something similar to what you did, almost like a mini-internet.
> The landlord is merciless if you miss a payment, you are out.
That’s a skill issue though.
I have a domain that i used to pre-pay for years in advance.
For my current main domain i had prepaid nine years in advance and it was paid up to 2028. A couple of years ago i topped it up and now it’s prepaid up to 2032.
It’s not much money (when I prepaid for 9 years i spent like 60€ or so) and you’re usually saving because you’re fixing the price so skipping price hikes, inflation etc.
Host the wrong content, you are out, get sued because of someone elses trademark on your domain, you are out, registrar actually dissolved or has weird stuff? out.
True...but there are alternative approaches...such as maybe register a couple (not alot) of alternative, different domains. I think the trick is to keep the number of alternative domains low enough that it wont break the bank, but still give the option of serving as sort of backups. Then again, one would need to understand one's "threat" model before beginning to post content that might be "attacked" by others.
It's something of a technical limitation though: there's no reason all my devices - the consumers of my domain name - couldn't just accept that anything signed with some key is actually XorNot.com or whatever...but good luck keeping that configuration together.
You very reasonably could replace the whole system with just "lists of trusted keys to names" if the concept has enough popular technical support.
Because URL shortening is relatively trivial to implement, and instead of just doing so on their own end, they decided to rely on a third-party service.
Considering link permanence was a "founding principle", that's just unbelievably stupid. If I decide one of my "founding principles" is that I'm never going to show up at work with a dirty windshield, then I shouldn't rely on the corner gas station's squeegee and cleaning fluid.
First of all, how the links are made permanent has nothing to do with the principle that they should be made permanent.
There seemed to be two principles at play here:
1. Links should always work
2. We don't want to store any user data
#2 is a bit complicated, because although it sounds nice, it has two potential justifications:
2a: For privacy reasons, don't store any user data
2b: To avoid having to think through the implications of storing all those things ourselves
I'm not sure how much each played into their thinking; possibly because of a lack of clarity, 2a sounded nice and 2b was the real motivation.
I'd say 2a is a reasonable aspiration; but using a link shortener changed it from "don't store any user data" to "store the user data somewhere we can't easily get at it", which isn't the same thing.
2b, when stated more clearly, is obviously just taking on technical debt and adding dependencies which may come back to bite you -- as it did.
> A sixth, broadly Marxian sort of objection rejects the project of defining art as an unwitting (and confused) expression of a harmful ideology.
But I don't think many serious critiques of "this is not art" claims invoke Marxism. The Marxist perspective generalises the idea that art is incredibly difficult to define, but doesn't originate it.
The first paragraph that talks about the OS itself is depressing:
>macOS Sequoia completes the new Mac Studio experience with a host of exciting features, including iPhone Mirroring, which allows users to wirelessly interact with their iPhone, its apps, and notifications directly from their Mac.
So that's their highlight for a pro workstation user.
Just be glad they didn't focus on movies, music and cute apps. Macs seems to be the only product line that continues to semi-dodge Apple's myopic media/services/social kiosk lens they now view all their other product lines through.
If that sounds too negative, compare their current vision for their products with Steve Jobs old vision of "a bicycle for the mind". iOS-type devices are very useful, but unleashing new potential, enabling generational software innovation, just isn't their thing.
(The Vision Pro is "just" another kiosk product for now, but it is hard to tell. The Mac support suggests they MIGHT get it. They should bifurcate:
1. A "Vision" can be the lower cost iOS type device, cool apps and movies product. Virtual Mac screen.
2. A future "Vision Pro that is a complete Mac replacement, the new high end Apple device, filled out spacial user interface for real work, etc. No development sandbox, Mx Ultra, top end resolution and field of view, raise the price, raise the price again, please. It could even do the reverse kind of support, power external screens that continued working like first class virtual screens, when you needed to share into the real world.
The Vision Pro should become a maximum powered post-Mac device. Not another Mac satellite. Its user interface possibilities go far beyond what Mac/physical screens will ever do. The new nuclear powered bicycle for the mind. But I greatly fear they want to box it in, "iPad" everything, even the Mac someday.)
I agree, except I wonder how they'll do this securely. Imagine if a VS Code plugin could spy on everything in front of me. Opens up a whole new level of security concerns.
They use a similar line on the MacBook Air page. If you're buying an (up to) $13,000 Mac, hopefully you already understand macOS and its features, I guess.
reply