lucb1e
Doesn't Apple helpfully offer logging in with their email address constantly? At any rate, they were receiving emails on it and I don't think the user knew how to add an email address. They couldn't find their email client's account settings in iOS, but they struggled with several inboxes in the email client.
I assume that when you start using the device (since that requires Apple account tying) they create a new 'free' email address and provision it onto your devices. From what I later found online, indeed Apple has separate settings for their cloud offerings as compared to when you buy it from a competitor, which afaik is anticompetitive but until all countries get around to sending desist notices... apple does what apple does best
The solution is probably to tell the senders that they're effectively sending out spam / doing a variant of open relaying by emailing the spoofed address, but even internet-savvy institutions like an IP address assigning organization (RIPE) sends me backscatter so I don't have a ton of hope
met someone a few weeks ago. They said their email address is @<german ISP>.de but half the time they're sending from @icloud.com, I guess because they have an phone from Apple and don't understand the settings
I volunteer at a library where people can come with tech questions. Just last week, someone asked to help sort out their email addresses because they have various, from Microsoft, from an ISP, and because they have an Apple phone of course Apple also pushed an icloud address onto them that they didn't want
Seems quite common to have a second sending address with how Apple is pushing its lock-in (email addresses are some of the hardest things to migrate). Though, also without that, I tend to think people typically migrate their primary email address at least once or twice in a lifetime, not counting business emails that are sometimes also allowed for reasonable amount of private use (not saying that's a good idea but people do it). Not that unusual
The image is blurred beyond readability, but via tineye.com I found what seems to be the original: https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4f68/2515569/99b99587... It splits out what environmental factors cause cancer. Unsurprisingly, your chance is already 25% lower if you don't smoke, but the rest of the pie chart is also interesting
Email receivers (be it Gmail or your local council) don't differentiate if you're self hosting or a business. So long as small businesses can manage (who have like one part-time sysadmin that also manages a ton of other IT stuff; email doesn't take much of their time), so can you. If you set up the usual suspects like SPF and DMARC, the domain is not a known spammer, and the IP not in a blocked address range, it's mostly hands-off (source: I self host my email)
If you need it to really be super reliable, yeah, you need to send through one of the big companies who have not just a dedicated sending IP address but entire ranges dedicated to email sending, as well as staff that will respond to delivery issues 24/7. Microsoft rejecting email from Google and vice versa isn't unheard of, so there aren't guarantees anywhere, but that would be your best bet. For my personal use, that extra nine of reliability isn't needed
The population crisis is that the current population isn't sustainable: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Overshoot_Day (and most of those haven't a rich lifestyle yet; most people on HN are in the top 10% worldwide income). We need either to become more sustainable per capita, have fewer capita, or get more earths. Any solution is fine. Otherwise, we'll run out, and the remaining 90% of people get a lot of undeserved worldsuck
Note that we are already doing what you want: world population is projected to increase by 25% (!) in the next 75 years. At the same time, we're lifting people out of poverty (https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-of-population-in-ex...) which causes them to be able to buy more stuff, live richer lives, and be less sustainable (e.g. visible on a CO2 chart for the same countries: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co-emissions-per-capita?c...). Which is fair right? Why shouldn't they get to live like us. But we can't go on like this; something has to give.
More people isn't helpful for at least another century. Let's evaluate the baby-making situation in 2100 and work on the real problems we face today
As a secondary problem, people (traditionally women, but with a two-income household it could be either party) often already can't leave a relationship because they can't support themselves and their child(ren) without the other half and so they're stuck in relationships that might either not work for them or that are downright abusive. With a big tax on leaving your partner... oof, why in the world would you want more lock-in?! Is this a manosphere control thing that I'm not aware of?
- The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks comes to mind. I had no idea how rampant purposeful discrimination was so recently for example, but the point of the book is the HeLa cells - and biology is also not my forté so loads of new information there as well. It was very interesting in expected and unexpected areas for me
- Daniel Suarez' Kill Decision has only gotten more relevant since its release in 2012. Not sure I'd call this meaty though, but his thrillers are always good (near-ish future tech) and the author iirc also said this particular one is meant as food for thought and not only entertainment
I haven't commented on this topic before (here or elsewhere) but I don't understand your surprise at people being critical. Everyone has a vested interest in keeping the planet usable. We could try lots of things in space, like agriculture or power production. It takes a lot of fuel to push a usable kilogram of stuff into a low orbit (laser propulsion and spin launches aren't quite there yet), so moving operations into orbit has various major downsides. So long as nobody states an upside, yeah, my mind is quite blown about wasting investor money on this. Even when not considering the opportunity cost of that used money (alternative positive uses), it seems like burning the equivalent amount of cash in a bonfire or otherwise disappearing the money would be a lesser evil
In desktops maybe, which will be somewhat popular still among people who play a lot of games but not a majority (IDC has laptop sales at a 3 to 1 ratio to desktops in 2022, but that's not specific to people who play games, much less (2d) Factorio players specifically). The system I bought before my current one was in 2018 and mid-tier then was 2GB. There was no craze for (V)RAM at the time, more a question of which setting you want to play games at (and with which render distance) than whether a given laptop works for games at all
As of last month, Steam reports that >15% of their customers still have 4GB VRAM or less: https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Softw...
I'm not familiar with Subnautica beyond the name, is that known for being particularly efficient?
edit: meant to say 4GB rather than 2GB in the Steam stats reference, fixed
Not everyone bought a GPU to run LLMs on. That is quite a bit of VRAM, especially for non-desktops
If you want "enough money to get an apartment/house, buy the basics they need", egalitarian Linke is the obvious choice, and the "and live in a safe environment" part is something literally everyone wants, hard to make a wrong choice there (though with their support for Russia, maybe AfD is questionable even on that front)
> when one of your bigger companies announces letting go of 100k people in the next few years
...then you need social welfare the most? Linke is the biggest proponent of that. What is the logic here?
> a result of people wanting something and the government doing the opposite
This is perhaps the most mind-blowing part. For decades, the right wing government with Merkle at the head did very little for long-term good, so what's the opposite of that? Move further right!! This time it'll work for sure! Blame all the foreigners, inside and outside. Kick them out, reduce international collaboration and trade, and for a cherry on top, fuck the global climate even more than the compromise position previous governments were already pursuing. That'll fix all future problems
No, obviously the opposite of leaving it all to the market and having strict immigration is to nationalize the things people actually need (as you say, things like housing) and have no concept of asylum (anyone can walk in and work here). Will that solve it? Maybe we need some middle ground? I'm not sure anyone has definitive answers to make a perfect world, but this nazi party is so far out there, saying it is "just an alternative" is like saying hitler was "just an option" that we could try and see how it works out. Yeah, people want something 'different' but what level of stupidity do you need to expect that voting for nazis is going to make things 'different and better' instead of 'different and worse'?
I really have no clue what this is supposed to refer to. LLMs with arms and legs, armed with pipes?
Yes, and this sucks. I moved ISPs because the original one had burned IP addresses that you can't send email from. Every ISP that gets the ranges burned like that will eventually either goes out of business or gets their act together. Not by tomorrow, but eventually
Like, the only other alternative outcome I see is that everyone has to pass through a central surveillance point that decides who's benign and who's naughty, and since nobody wants that... what else are we to do but report abuse?
> What do you expect the ISPs to do in this story? We are talking about TLS connections.
What they've done to me when I abused a service as a teenager, the ISP got an abuse notification: cut off the connection, ask the subscriber wtf this traffic is and how they're going to make sure it doesn't happen again (at which point my dad, the subscriber, came to me and asked if I knew something about this.... yeah ^^')
TLS doesn't matter because the ones receiving the abusive traffic can say what it was. Their access logs will contain the decrypted information and that should be put in an abuse report. If the customer denies everything, turn on netflow logging for a month and see if a future abuse report comes in that can be correlated against the netflow logs. Or have netflow logs stored for 1h by default and retain the entries for which an abuse notification came in (grep for IP addresses in incoming notifications). Lots of reasonable options there; this isn't the difficulty. It's getting people to send that abuse notification so the ISP can identify the problematic subscribers