When I was younger these type of machines were great for me. I usually used them at home but sometimes in my bedroom (aka office) and sometimes in the living room (group games, playing music, just watching TV with the roommates). I would also occasionally take them to school or other people's house (projects, LAN parties).
So it was used primarily like a desktop, and as my only system having power was useful. But the fact that I could put it in my backpack and transport it was super valuable.
Now I do have a more portable laptop and a full desktop setup. But at the time that wasn't the best option.
BoringTun is unmaintained. There are various forks being developed.
I work at Obscura VPN and faced with boringtun bugs a few years ago we evaluated a few of the forks and switched our client to be based on top of NepTUN (https://github.com/NordSecurity/NepTUN).
I am curious why Mullvad started their own fork rather than building on top of one of the existing ones. It would be nice if there could be reconsolidation somewhere.
I'm not sure that is necessary a bad reason. You need to factor in a lot of concerns to determine what "too expensive" means.
But if you are going to spend billions of dollars to develop a drug that only treats about 2 people a year it is likely too expensive even if it is 100% effective. That money would be better spent on treatments that have wider applicability.
Of course this is not simple to measure. Costs aren't known upfront and the research may end up proving invaluable to more widely applicable treatments.
So it is a judgment call and not necessarily a bad reason.
Agreed it isn't necessarily a bad reason. In some cases it's a good reason for failure (like the one you describe).
In other cases it's a bad reason for failure: it's also incredibly expensive to prove your drug works even if it does work for a lot of people.
That's bad! It'd be better if it were cheaper.
Actually counterintuitively, due to a weird drug approval and payor reimbursement policy arbitrage, pharma companies are highly incentivized to produce drugs for tiny populations.
One of my hobby horses is railing against this specific dynamic.
If it has a five year start and we've seen almost zero hardware shipping that is a pretty bad sign.
IIRC AV1 decoding hardware started shipping within a year of the bitstream being finalized. (Encoding took quite a bit longer but that is pretty reasonable)
Yeah, that's... sparse uptake. A few smart TV SOCs have it, but aside from Intel it seems that none of the major computer or mobile vendors are bothering. AV2 next it is then!
> Acceptable behavior includes renewing certificates at approximately two thirds of the way through the current certificate’s lifetime.
So you can start renewing with 30d of lifetime remaining. You probably want to retry once or twice before alerting. So lets say 28d between alert and expiry.
That seems somewhat reasonable. But is basically the lower margin of what I consider so. I feel like I should be able to walk away from a system for a month with no urgent maintenance needed. 28d is really cutting it close. I think the previous 60d was generous but that is probably a good thing.
I really hope they don't try to make it shorter than this. Because I really don't want to worry about certificate expiry during a vacation.
Alternatively they could make the acceptable behaviour much higher. For example make 32d certificates but it is acceptable to start renewing them after 24h. Because I don't really care how often my automation renews them. What matters is the time frame between being alerted due to renewal failure and expiry.
“I really hope they don’t try to make it shorter than this. Because I really don’t want to worry about certificate expiry during a vacation.”
You might want to consider force-renewing all your certs a few days before your vacation. Then you can go away for over 40 days. (Unless something else breaks…)
Might not be a bad idea if it is within their rate limit rules but I'd really rather not take a manual action before leaving a system alone for a while and not worry that I managed to force renew every single cert.
If you forget a cert then you’re no worse off than the case where the automation fails during the vacation.
You could also run a simple program that checks each site and tells you the remaining lifetime of the cert used, to verify that you didn’t miss any cert.
It all depends on the scale of your operations, of course.
This is unfortunately true. It feels like "1rem" should be the ideal body don't size. But on desktop browsers this is often quite small.
Personally I configure my browser's default font size (1rem) to something nice and readable, but I'm sure that the number of people who do this is <10%. Probably closer to 1%.
But either way I would recommend against hardcoding a size in px.
I think it is worse than that. Yes they A/B test. But they also have incentive to show how great their new feature idea is. So they are always picking the metrics that make their feature look better and ignoring the ones that make it look worse. So there is a thumb on the scale here.
Yes, I very happily payed for YouTube Premium when it came with Google Play Music. Them turning that off in favour of the awful YouTube Music was the straw that broke the camels back.
So it was used primarily like a desktop, and as my only system having power was useful. But the fact that I could put it in my backpack and transport it was super valuable.
Now I do have a more portable laptop and a full desktop setup. But at the time that wasn't the best option.
reply