Yeah... I'm just now realizing how relying on unit count in the listing is more problematic than I thought. Sellers say their unit count is 1, but the product title says it is 4 dozen. I need to figure out how to fix these inconsistencies.
Most of the people working at Ars are the exact same people who have been working there for the better part of their entire existence (source: me) Most of them _are_ experts in their fields, and most are vastly more qualified in their fields than pretty much anyone else publishing online (both now and 20 years ago).
It seems that _certain kinds of individuals_ have had rose-colored glasses on about pretty much everything online, but for Ars especially for some reason.
They detest change in a publication that covers the reality of actual life and technology, rather that commit suicide and stay covering stuff the same way they did in 1997—which 8 people total want to read (and not pay for, by the way).
Ars has been operating at an exceptionally high level for their entire history and have outlasted many other flashes-in-the-pan which are now relegated to the dust bin of history.
Is Ken still actively involved? He seems to appear to clarify something and then disappear into the background until the next major change (I expect the article about this to be bylined to him, as is appropriate).
tl;dr : the website formerly known as office.com that was a portal for accessing a bunch of stuff changed name to "Microsoft 365" in 2022, and then again more recently (adding the copilot bit).
Edit: Although the horror show that is Microsoft product naming in that area left the door wide open for this confusion.
Replacing Office with Microsoft 365 as the brand is still stupid. I was messing with Windows 11 a while back pre Copilot, and in the start menu was a pre installed spam link for “Microsoft 365 (Office)”. The fact they had to put the old brand in parentheses at the end should have been a hint they’re doing something stupid.
On digging further: OK, this is not really creating anything at all, it's just merging the NCA and various existing regional organised crime outfits together into one body.
In the last week or two it's been rumoured that Oppo are pulling the plug on OnePlus, and are going to wind up the brand entirely. (Although it may cling on in certain markets, like India).
Their website is indeed out of date. Reminds me of Haxe in that aspect. The language itself is receiving significant development, but the website looks abandoned, and no new blog posts have been posted in a while.
From one of the photos, the cable spec "G657A2" is visible on the outside - and specs listed for that indicate it's "bending insensitive single-mode fibre", apparently it can tolerate 10 loops around 15mm mandrel. (Which does surprise me).
But yes, agreed, a lot of "Er... why would you do it like that?" bits.
Those 10 loops definitely only apply to the single mode fibre itself, not the entire assembly with armor and everything, because that's just... physically impossible.
Cables for direct burial only like to be bent once or twice, and then only gently. Anything else may very well break the armor (whether plastic or metal), after which all bets are off.
Still, for the outer jacket to become brittle to the extent described, something else is required, which may very well turn out to be "shoddy manufacturing"...
Basic version is it's a sort of developer focused zero trust network service.
Encrypted overlay network based on wireguard tunnels, with network ACLs based around identity, and with lots of nice quality-of-life features, like DNS that just works and a bunch of other stuff.
(Other stuff = internet egress from your tailscale network ('tailnet') through any chosen node, or feeding inbound traffic from a public IP to a chosen node, SSH tied into the network authentication.
There is also https://github.com/juanfont/headscale - which is a open source implementation of some of tailscale's server side stuff, compatible with the normal tailscale clients.
(And there are clients for a very wide range of stuff).
I can’t tell if you’re trying to help, or just getting into the spirit of the website’s “how it works (using ten pages of terminology and acronyms we just made up)” page.
None of the terminology or acronyms that user used were made up or unique to this. I think you are blaming other people for your unfamiliarity with this kind of tech.
It is simply a managed service that lets you hook devices up to an overlay network, in which they can communicate easily with each other just as though they were on a LAN even if they are far apart.
For example, if you have a server you'd like to be able to SSH into on your home network, but you don't want to expose it to the internet, you can add both it and your laptop to a Tailscale network and then your laptop can connect directly to it over the Tailscale network no different than if you were at home.
Sorry if I appeared rude. That was very much tongue in cheek.
But notice how you just did a much better job of explaining what this thing does without using any jargon at all. The jargon helps if everyone already knows what you’re talking about. It hurts if anyone doesn’t.
That’s what I’m poking fun at. There’s a trait in lots of engineers I’ve worked with over the years to be almost afraid to talk about tech stuff in layman terms. Like they’re worried that someone will think less of them because they used words instead of an acronym. Like they won’t get credit for knowing what a zero trust network is if they describe the concept in a way that regular people might understand.
One of those guys was certainly in charge of this company’s website copy.
Perhaps if we were on Reddit, and also on a general subreddit, then people would speak in less technical terms.
Since this is HN, it’s almost expected the participants here would either know the terms, or at the very least be able to find out what they mean on their own and realize it’s not made up jargon but rather common industry terms.
Tailscale is not trying to sell to the average buyer, it’s trying to sell to a specific audience.
> Like they won’t get credit for knowing what a zero trust network is if they describe the concept in a way that regular people might understand.
I've been trying to get a definition of zero trust at $client from the security people who are pushing tools onto our platform, so we can have an honest conversation around threats and risks, and finding the best balance of tools, techniques and processes to achieve their desired outcomes.
Unfortunately, it seems like everybody just want "zero trust" because a vendor sold them on that idea and they gave money to the vendor, so now there's the need to justify that expense and "extract value" from the tool - even if it may in fact be worse than the controls that are already in place.
The submitter's description does make reference to this a bit, the Amazon product description quantity for these items is "1"...
And it gets more complicated for the ones that are 2 dozen, plus 1 dozen 'free'...
reply