Setting aside all of the technical aspects of this, the history of this in the world of UNIX, I just love the process and bureaucracy that generated this specific paper document. The very formal cover sheet (and the fact that it had an accompanying, separate, numbered instruction document), the pre-determined layout and format of a Technical Memorandum, and the fact that this was published as such a memorandum with filing and control numbers that will be researched and looked up in a library instead of just a blog or post on Medium
Depends where you work. Judging from reading HN, 95% of all devs here are writing webshitapps for companies that don't give a flying eff about development, just profits. I develop embedded hardware for tier 1 automotive manufacturers, and we have to adhere to several ISO standards, and a number of tools for managing documentation and code hygiene. Traceability of requirements, security, functional safety, and risk assessments are associated with every single decision and every single code commit. It is a lot of documentation, but I'm a pedant and I love it. It is a design process for adults, by adults.
> I’ve seen plenty of places that use Citrix with terminals.
I doubt very many enterprise level IT departments are running any kind of thin client infra such as Citrix or Horizon or anything else (like, god forbid, Oracle) without maintenance agreements in place on both the software and the hardware side of things so just moving everything left and renting the whole stack instead of having half of it capex and half of it opex isn't that big of a shift in how these things are paid for
The author of this post seems to think that a) Microsoft is targeting end users with the device (they're not, they're targeting IT departments) and b) that IT departments don't know exactly what they're getting into or have no control over this thing
IT administrators will have plenty of control over this, and the software it runs, and the configuration of it
I'm not sure the author has ever worked in or has any knowledge of corporate IT departments, their priorities, or how any of it works
Apple doesn't have 100% market share and the title is "most people"
The fact that Android has a larger market share, and Apple has a larger share of revenue and profit actually goes to show that the larger mass market doesn't care about quality as much as price
It still kind of low-key boggles my mind that so many developers choose iPhones and buy into that ecosystem. Not criticizing them... everybody makes their own choices and gets to decide what's good for themselves. But I just don't get it.
(And it's not because I haven't heard the stated reasons. They just don't resonate with me.)
Yes, but, the case was only dismissed when he had a positive alibi against the charges, when the charges should only happen when there is positive evidence against him
He didn't even have an alibi until later. At first he could not remember where he was that night, his girlfriend had to remind him later. So when he was charged there was an eyewitness describing someone like him, he had no alibi at the time, a previous record, and he had strong motive having attended a hearing in which the victim had just testified against his brother in a gang murder that the brother is serving time for as an accomplice. That is more than enough for reasonable suspicion or probable cause. Then during the discovery period his now remembered alibi checked out and he was released. That is due process working.
An eyewitness report describing someone like him, not him, was the only evidence placing him at the scene. That should never be enough evidence to charge. That isn't due process, that is finding someone to fit the crime whether they may have done it or not. There is far too much needing to prosecute, than only prosecuting when certain.
I said like him because it turned out to not be him but the eye witness identified it as him. That plus motive and him not having an alibi is probable cause where one is charged. Any more than that is what a trial is for but he was cleared with his alibi checking out before it ever got that far.
I heard that some 2024 models refuse to go through the setup wizard without internet access. Not sure what happens if you disconnect it after setup though. But my Amazon Fire Stick already refuses to do anything without internet even though I could stream locally with vlc.
I wonder if this is a market specific thing, that is to say if it is turned on or off depending on which market you're in. For example I wonder if there are pertinent regulations applying in EU, if so I would expect it were turned off in EU.
My money’s on a joint venture with Comcast, Cox, Verizon, et al. to use the Wi-Fi access points their routers operate – even if you use your own router and block them, your neighbors almost certainly don’t. Most them already have business ties and would love to have better ad targeting data.
Man, at that point I would open up the back and snip/desolder the antenna itself. I hate ads on my TV, ESPECIALLY when I've already paid for the damn thing!
That's highly speculative, but even if that did end up happening, the smart TVs sold today wouldn't magically gain that capability, especially if you keep it off the network and never update it.
No, because it wasn't a true channel. It took two 6mhz "channels" on the cable system in that it occupied two 6mhz wide spots whose frequencies are in the cable TV bandplan, but the actual modulation of the RF would not have been recognizable as anything other than noise to NTSC tuners
Eventually the cable guys were coming for AT&T's lunch, regardless of what happened with their monopoly. It's the rare circumstance where two seemingly unrelated utilities converged into the same business (moving bits, instead of analog video or audio) and we lucked into having two internet facilities in large portions of the country
Local Access is a very different issue, and I dont really disagree - but the local copper loop being broadband is an accident and one of technological evolution.
When the decisions were made about divesiture, that bit was non obvious.
>It’s not that technology isn’t revered; far from it. It’s just that “stopping Hitler,” “beating the Soviets,” and grand visions for society have been replaced with visions of creating lucrative businesses
Universities are tripping over themselves to create commercialization departments and every other faculty member in departments that can make money (like CS) has a private company on the side. Weird that when these things hit, though, the money never comes back to the schools
The academic entrepreneur phenomenon is an absolute sink, but it exists for a reason and ought to wake people up,
Universities put a lot of pressure on faculty to win grants, and take 60-70% of the proceedings for “overhead”, which is supposed to fund less sellable research and provide job security but is, in practice, wasted.
You have to be a fundraiser and a seller if you want to make tenure, but if people are forced to basically put up with private sector expectations, can you fault them when they decide to give themselves private sector pay?
We used to be a real society