mixdup

I get using AI to figure out things you might not otherwise have figured out but just copy/pasting the output from AI into a blog post is not interesting to me. Take 10 minutes to humanize the output. Write the blog post and tell us how you did it, including how you used AI, how you prompted it, etc. But I don't need someone's claude transcript as the only output. Ugh

I think geographic dispersion of batteries is going to be a big plus. If the "battery" is a giant lake or a big plant with a spinning mass, the power has to be transmitted from that facility to the end user over the grid

Putting a ton of smaller chemical batteries at distribution substations means when the grid is at the peak, you can cover that peak without transmitting that power over the transmission system. Putting the battery near the consumer will take a big load off of the transmission system which as much of a bottleneck as the lack of generating facilities

you would be way way better off just buying some actual batteries

I wasn't trying to excuse anything, just explain that they haven't done nothing, but also why it's still an issue. I agree with you they've dropped the ball here. If I were a betting person I'd guess this is just something that slipped through the cracks and there will be changes whether that's to the release process for pushing OS updates, to the fast-track security update process, or to the OS so that everything is working off the same trust store

That fast-track method was used, but it only applies to "graphical" software which really means, software that uses Apple's macOS specific APIs and frameworks, not the lower level UNIX stuff like /etc/ssl

I suspect the fast-track background security updates can only update the databases and revocation lists that live in the proprietary APIs, not any arbitrary file on the system

I'm not parent comment OP

I mean in many (most?) states travelling in the left lane is a moving violation

Using it to fish for other violations is where it crosses into the fuzzy and sometimes outright illegal

The counter to this is demand that they write you the ticket for the moving violation, don't answer any questions other than providing the legally required license, registration, and insurance, and move on

If they don't have evidence of a crime, they can't detain you forever on the roadside

>or a reception desk at a business

This is basically 99% of the proposition of the iMac at this point. If you don't need the specific all-in-one, color, and other design aspects of the iMac or can afford a Studio display, there's no reason not to buy some other display + a Mac mini or a laptop + display

In a world where most stocks don't pay dividends, rationality is kind of out the window. As long as these companies don't go outright bankrupt, or have to sell a bunch of new equity to stay solvent (and therefore dilute existing shares) there's no actual monetary consequence of a company doing good or bad. It's literally just going on vibes

Honestly, in a company that isn't returning capital to shareholders, I don't see the point if it's a company that isn't somehow subject to a potential acquisition. If you don't have a path to monetize your stake, why buy it? These days, just vibes. TSLA and SPCX might as well just be another crypto like Bitcoin

But Microsoft has turned layoffs at the end/beginning of the fiscal year into an iPhone-like release schedule. It's so reliable at this point that it's a meme outside the company amongst its customers. I know for a fact each June/July I'm getting a new account team as people are shuffled around, and low performers are shown the door

Even with these buyouts, there will be layoffs next summer. And the summer after that. And the summer after that.

they know for sure many fewer will accept. there's probably a clause in there that only so many people will be allowed to accept

One of the weirdest bits of 90s tech trivia: Scott Forstall, who was in charge of software at Apple when the iPhone was initially developed, when working as an Intern at Microsoft contributed to the development of WordArt: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Forstall#Present

Your municipal ISP is buying upstream connectivity from someone. You're lucky that your local government is competent enough to run an ISP and keep it secure and reliable. At least we assume they are, maybe they've just been lucky till now. If that works for your town, go for it. In many places, though, that would be a tall ask

As to the wholesale network being GPON, there's always a point at which the network goes from a shared medium to a dedicated strand to the house. Wherever the PON splitter is, multiple splitters could be co-located, or, direct connections to be patched into for ISPs that don't want to use GPON. A dedicated connection is another place competition could exist, for example

There's more than just the physical pipe from the distribution point to your house

ISPs could compete on lack of congestion on their backbone, privacy, latency, price, "value add" features (like email, website hosting, etc), and speed depending on the model of the wholesale network

just about every provider of any significance has dropped data caps in the US. Once fiber hit a critical mass, the cable companies dropped their limits

Wireless is much different, one physical piece of infrastructure covers a wide area, vs. wireline requires touching literally every location along the route. The economics are very different

It's why at one point we had 4 satellite TV options in the US at one time (C-Band, Primestar, DirecTV, and Dish Network all existed at the same time) but in 98% of the US there was only ever one cable company (some small cable companies did try to overbuild but it was and is extremely rare) and certainly only ever one landline phone company

Telephone and data is an interesting one. It's an area that on its face is a natural monopoly, but in much of the US we ended up with two telecom providers

Telephone was a monopoly because it doesn't make sense to have more than one company string a wire to every house and business. But, all that wire could carry until the 90s was a voice call

Likewise, in the 60s/70s/80s cable TV became a thing but it didn't make sense to have more than one TV wire to every house, because it already has all the TV you can get, and at the time all it could carry was video channels

In the 90s these networks converged: when everything is digital, a network carrying digital signals can carry any kind of data

So, in urbanized and suburban areas we largely have a competitive market in what would otherwise be a natural monopoly. The problem is, because it's competitive in like 80-90% of the country everyone's been relieved of their universal service obligations (which applied only to voice service anyway) so there's been little incentive to expand into more rural and underserved areas

In the Georgia (US state, not country) there is one investor owned utility (Georgia Power) that is regulated like you mention by the state. They have to get rates and new plants and basically everything approved by the state Public Service Commission. We'll set aside how the PSC is basically a captured regulatory agency, but in theory they are highly regulated and don't just get to do what they want. GPC serves about little more than half the state's population, and about a quarter of the physical land mass

The rest of the state is served by either local cities with their own utilities or cooperatives. The cooperatives are not government agencies, they are privately owned non-profit corporations whose customers are the owners. These companies aren't regulated by the state PSC and have the ability to set their own rates unilaterally. The only regulation they have is that they report their rates to the PSC, but it's just a report, no approval

Technically they're almost all subject to regulation by the US Government as a condition of taking loans in the 30s/40s (and most of them have rolled that financing over and continue to use it to finance operations even today) but for the most part that regulation just says they have to at least charge enough to cover their interest, and can't sell their systems without the feds' approval

They could raise rates as much as they want, but the structure of a customer-owned company like that is the profits just get redistributed back to the customers, so there's no reason or incentive to do so

And, FWIW, that 23% number from the linked article is about right. GPC is usually 15-20% higher than most of the coops and city-owned systems in Georgia (there are some that are higher). And this is even with some of those coops and cities actually buying power wholesale from GPC

This is a great example/argument for how a competitive local ISP market can work. The city/county/state should string fiber to every single house, and then various ISPs can just plug a customer into their particular switch/OLT/splitter.

A common "monopoly" of the physical last mile served by many providers traveling over it

> Were you born into a world with electricity naturally occurring in sockets?

Massive swaths of the US required government action to get telephone and electric service. In many cities/counties, the city or county owns the power utility. In other rural/suburban situations the power utility is a non-profit cooperative that was encouraged/bootstrapped through low interest loans in the 30s and 40s. Telephone universal service was achieved because AT&T agreed to it in exchange for the government allowing it to be a (natural) monopoly

Age is probably less relevant than current installed base/active users

>Imagine doing everything possible to stop something. They then circumvent your protections with yet another service, and you get fined.

The point is that they want to use these cases to get global blocks in place. Geoblocking a single country from accessing content that country wants blocked is not doing everything that could be done. They could remove access to that content for all users everywhere, then the block could not be circumvented

I'm not saying that is what they should have done or should do or that they should give in to any of these situations, but that is the end goal of someone like Sony in these cases. They want to block it in the territory in question, yes, but truly the purpose of these laws is to apply those rules and controls globally

It's funny that you think Microsoft doesn't have at least a single person living and working in Liechtenstein

Take out the word root from my original reply. If you aren't prepared to immediately stop trusting a CA--root, intermediate, internal, then your process is broken

"no one was quite prepared for intermediate certificate revocation" is actually worse because as an intermediate CA, they obviously didn't meet the requirements to be a full root CA, so why wouldn't they be more likely to need revocation than a root? Honestly more negligent than being unable to revoke a root.

eMuhdra is an Indian company. Maybe the regulations are different in India vs. America?

I mean, yeah I get your point but also if these pieces of the stack weren't prepared to deal with a compromised CA, then they were also at least a little bit negligent. There's always a chance this is going to happen. There's a chance it could happen and there not be any negligence or incompetence on the part of the CA

But at the end of the day if you're not prepared to revoke the trust of any CA you trust, it's a you problem

Fun fact, that's basically the case in large swaths of the country. Many states do not have home rule, which means counties can't set zoning rules. So in mostly rural areas of these states, it's wide open unless the state has decided to set rules or to be benevolent enough to grant the county the right to set zoning rules

Is this what's behind the "link to the article in comments" that all news outlets do on FB?

Never once have heard about Warby Parker being a PBC

Let's Encrypt has always had short-lived certificates, long before they were mandated by the CAB. They've been pushing the cutting edge here