I always thought WASTE was so cool, but my family was pretty late get off of dialup to be able to actually use it. Sounds like it's still around in some form, do people actually use it nowadays?
This was always the dream for 3D printing, heck going back to classic Star Trek replicators and other science fiction. Granted, even with these models available it's kinda difficult to print large organic shapes like the main housing shells on most affordable consumer printers so I suspect there might not be too many people actually doing it. However, having the exact CAD files makes designing mods and 3rd party upgrades much easier.
The concern with this law is that it's constructed in such a way that the only way to comply may end up being for VPN providers to ban Utah. Though that's not the same as Utah banning VPNs since private VPNs would still work, for most users it would be since setting a private VPN up is beyond most people.
Plus the issue of compelling otherwise fully lawful speech around providing VPN instructions.
It's 4x faster? If you have a storage server, its easy to exceed 2.5 or even 5 gigabit with SATA spinning disks if they're in an array. 10 gig is fast enough to work with network storage like it's local: do your work, store your steam library, edit videos, etc, but store it all somewhere else and share it with multiple computers.
Even CAT5e can do 10 Gbps if you do a decent job making the cable, even though it's out of spec. 6A can do it easily, in spec. I used it in my previous home.
I much prefer to use fiber, but copper with good old RJ45 works fine for 10 gig.
I have an NTP clock that uses GPS PPS and has a local TXDO. For any reasonable amount of time that you'd be out of GPS (barring nuclear war) a TXDO should be plenty sufficient for any sane time-related needs at a tiny fraction of the cost. Serving as a frequency reference for radio or precision counters or other semi-exotic (for at home) is the only reason I can see to actually have CSAC other than cool factor. Which, fair.
That 'local TXDO' is most likely being governed by some kind of phase lock on the PPS or some other divisor and may well lead to terrible clock jitter in the short term while giving you insane precision over the longer term. Allan deviation plots made by a device clocked by a standard that is better than the one that you are checking is the only way to be sure how good (or bad) things really are.
I have a couple of GPSDOs here and it is fun to play them against each other, the differences in the short term can be substantial, but over anything more than a few days they are extremely accurate.
Also how much short-term inaccuracy there is depends on the type of oscillator used. An OCXO will (usually) have less short-term jitter and better stability with ambient temperature changes than a chip-scale atomic clock module, but will drift more than the atomic clock long-term. The really expensive setups combine various clocks to maximize stability over all the durations of interest & minimize influence from various external factors (temperature, humidity, barometric pressure, external magnetic fields, other EMI, gravitational bias, etc.).
Gravitational bias is a really fun one since you can easily demonstrate it & its' not immediately obvious. Take a quartz oscillator, and a reference oscillator. Measure the frequency of both. Turn the quartz oscillator on its side. The phase (and usually also frequency) will change: the physical quartz has inertia & gravitational mass, so changing its orientation changes how it oscillates. In one orientation the movement of the quartz atoms is perpendicular to the force of gravity, so both directions of oscillation are biased the same amount. In another orientation one the movement of the quartz atoms is parallel to the force of gravity, so the part of the crystal moving down accelerates a bit more than the part of the crystal moving up.
> An OCXO will (usually) have less short-term jitter and better stability with ambient temperature changes than a chip-scale atomic clock module, but will drift more than the atomic clock long-term.
Indeed! And that short term stability of a (good) OCXO is most impressive, you can fairly easily outperform a GPSDO and with a little work and a lot of attention to supply voltage and other external influences you can even (short term) outperform an atomic clock. But aging is a thing, you'll need to re-calibrate almost every week if you care about that kind of precision. I have a bunch of different standards to compare with each other and the first time I got lucky with a very good OCXO I was wondering if I had made some kind of mistake, it was that stable.
That gravitational bias thing sounds very interesting, I knew it existed but did not realize you could trivially demonstrate it like that, I'll have to try this.
I'm aware, and yeah GPS is disciplining the TXCO, but I'm saying it's stable enough for non specialty uses outside of stuff like serving as a frequency reference. If you just want a clock source for NTP without the internet then all of this is already overkill.
You're also not likely to be out of GPS for particularly long stretches of time.
FWIW, not all mechanicals are loud. The clicky audible feedback is a deliberate thing on some types of switch, and you can get others with less or even virtually no noise.
My interpretation was that it's easier to physically force someone to mash their finger on the sensor than to get them to divulge a password, not that it offers you any kind of legal protection. But yeah, it's a plausible but somewhat contrived situation to find yourself in.
It does offer you legal protection. In the US, the right to not self incriminate protect you from divulging passwords but does not protect you from giving up biometrics. In other countries the rule is different.
It's an enjoyable read, hopefully it's the start of a whole new arc in the series with more to come. My only real complaint is it's short and I want more. If you never read his other Interdependency series, it's also great.
Hasn't menu bar applets crowding with no official overflow menu been a problem with MacOS with an obvious solution (add an overflow menu) for... 2+ decades now? I know third party solutions exist and it's kind of an edge case, but still, I remember encountering this back in the day on my ancient plastic Macbook.
It's much worse than it used to be. Before it was only really a problem with apps with a lot of menus, and you could access the items by switching to an app with fewer of them. Now, the notch takes up a lot of space, and you hit it really soon on a 14" display—I can only have maybe three third party menu applets on top of my collection of built-in ones before they disappear into the notch.
I think it's not just the notch, but that menu bar icons are more widely spaced than they used to be. I want to say it happened around Sonoma (10.14)? I was working on a Mac app at the time. Icon styles went from dense with a generally square clickable area to widely spaced, wide rectangular clickable area, and a highlight with rounded corners when clicked.
I have a 16 inch and even I moved to the “no notch” resolution last year because a ton of apps don’t let you choose whether to have a menu icon, and many of them are required corporate crapware. Apple should have bought Bartender and made it part of the OS 10 years ago, or at least before shipping this stupid notch. Apple’s “we know what you need better than you do” approach is so exhausting.
reply