jiveturkey

hilarious that their headline message, on every web page, is `Backed by YC`.

also, the product is way behind their competitors anyway.

really cool exploit they found here, but that doesn't make them a company worth doing business with.

China absolutely could do something if they wanted to. No treaty just means they aren't obligated to "do something", not that they can't. For example, if the US wanted to reinstate the $800 no tariff policy in exchange for Vernon, I guarantee you they'd arrest him and turn him over.

I can't find any reference to Vernon's citizenship, ie if he is a Chinese citizen or not. Which would change the math.

they "cannot" blacklist the domains on geoIP basis, yet the "can" withdraw from France? via what method? Removing the French servers is clearly insufficient, so why can they deny France entirely via geoIP, but not block the domains just via geoIP?

they do claim a value-based reason (good on them for it), but they are very very insistent about the "impossibility" anyway. can't have it both ways.

note that the client using an enterprise tier does not grant the same privilege.

gonna hard disagree! you aren't going to have 360° projector in there with wasted light going nowhere. you're going to have 1-4 steerable projectors. the "facade" as a globe bulb means you can place it at any direction you like depending on where the cord needs to go. for ceiling as well you don't want it to have a fixed throw direction. bulb makes perfect sense.

i doubt there's all that many beneficial owners of montana businesses that live in california, but surely there are many nevadans and oregonians that straddle the border and will get unfairly caught up in this.

but it's only worth the effort if you are rich enough to buy cars that incur substantial tax and reg fees. you still need to have insurance and the dealership kind of insurance costs a lot. you probably aren't going to get umbrella coverage to include it either, so you'll have more limited liability.

consoles are sold at a loss, best information i can dig up is that this is still true today, even after all the volume.

unfortunately, no.

and then up the stack a bit, they are confused about DNS' role in attack mitigation, at least generally speaking. perhaps there is something specific to their own DNS setup where this made a difference. they should just strike that part of the PM entirely.

that said, their reaction time is amazing. this would have included live troubleshooting during an ongoing incident! criticism aside, i wouldn't hesitate to use them if I wanted EU service.

instead of "i'd like to give some feedback, may I?" at the end, the interviewer should just ask the damn question in real time. "that description is very high level. that is great for an external summary, when the decision is already made and you want to communicate, not discuss. so i appreciate that. can you go into more detail and justify your choices, as if for an audience of peers and for discussion?"

a good interview should be an interactive exercise, not a one way explanation from the candidate. even LC/DSA type rounds should always find the candidate asking for clarifications, asking if they are on the right track is this what you are looking for, should i be attacking this a different way, etc.

and i would never give unsolicited positive feedback. even when you are the final decision maker, other rounds may uncover weak spots and there may not be a consensus to hire. by giving the positive feedback you confuse the candidate and make a no-hire result even worse. leave it to the recuiter/HR to do that.

as an interviewer i always mention whether i will recommend them for hire (if it's a yes) and that's it. iff asked i provide critical feedback. as a candidate i always ask for critical feedback, which gives me the chance to sharpen any answer when the interviewer doesn't do a good job on asking for what they really wanted.

VPN providers at the tier of Mullvad should be precise about this stuff -- I think it's more than just a nitpick, considering the audience. oh god did I just use an emdash.

Note that you need some flavor of secure DNS to enforce ECH. The protocol is designed to be downgradable.

They can just claim that the user is free to turn off SIP and "modify" the binary bits, or that kernel extensions amount to modification.

I would expect that Linux users want access to age-verified apps just as much as other users, so such a signal will be available.

Also, you're being overly pedantic on the language used. It transfers liability away from the service, more easily allowing operation in about half of the states. "age verification" is a fine lay description.

That is decidedly not a solution. Neighboring APs necessarily need to be on different channels, to avoid Co-Channel Interference (CCI). An AP doesn't answer just on BSSID but also on a specific channel.

this is easily solved with current technology, if they had an incentive to do so.

besides firing folks that get caught, flock themselves should be brought to court.

Also, for domains that are just "parked", not in current use, obviously the parking page can just have a for-sale banner. This is exceedingly common.

> Enquiries that would have been welcome never arrive, and the ones that do arrive are indistinguishable from spam.

Laughable misrepresentation.