• 0 Posts
  • 16 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: March 20th, 2025

help-circle

  • Yeah, Tailscale’s “zero-config” idea is great as long as things actually work correctly… But you immediately run into issues when you need to configure things, because Tailscale locks you out of lots of important settings that would otherwise be accessible.

    For instance, the WiFi at my job blocks all outbound WireGuard connections. Meaning I can’t connect to my tailnet when I’m at work, unless I hop off the WiFi and tether to my personal cell phone (which has a monthly data cap). Tailscale is built on WireGuard, and WireGuard only. If I could swap it to use OpenVPN or IKEv2 instead, I could bypass the problem entirely. But instead, I’m forced to just run an OpenVPN server at home, and connect using that instead of using Tailscale.



  • Appeals aren’t an infinite thing. Each appeal goes to a higher court, and eventually will reach the SCOTUS. And at any point, the respective appellate court can refuse to accept the appeal, essentially saying that they agree with the lower court’s ruling and leaving it in effect.

    Each step of the appeals process basically asks if the lower court applied the corresponding laws correctly. And if they did, the appellate court looks at whether or not that law is constitutional. If both are true, (the law is constitutional and was applied correctly) then the appeal fails. Appeals are actually fairly hard to win, especially for laws that have lots of precedent. If a law already has lots of precedent and the lower court was simply applying the law the same way that other cases did, the appeal will almost certainly be shot down.

    That’s why lots of the big landmark “court strikes down law as unconstitutional” cases are from laws that were recently passed. There is no long-standing precedent for the recently passed law, so the lower courts have to set the precedent, and the appeal is actually what is deciding whether or not the law is constitutional.



  • Yes and no. The hardware companies have already said that they’re not interested in expanding production. They know it’s a bubble, and don’t want expanded production now to cause a glut in the future when the inevitable pop happens. So prices may not actually drop, (even after the pop), because the companies still won’t be producing more hardware than they currently are.

    My best guess is that we’ll have some dark data centers sitting around collecting dust, but the hardware they bought won’t actually flood the market and crash prices. If anything, since the US dollar’s value is essentially tied to Nvidia and OpenAI’s market share, a pop will only make the dollar less powerful and will counteract any potential drops in prices that may have otherwise happened. The companies will get a trillion dollar bailout when the pop happens, (because they’re too big to fail) then nothing will change about the current hardware prices.




  • Sure, for printing. But printing isn’t the only form of subtractive color. Plenty of natural pigments exist. Those can be quantified with CMY or RGB values and then reproduced elsewhere, even though the natural pigment itself isn’t directly targeting those three wavelengths. My point is that subtractive color exists everywhere, using all sorts of natural color filtering mechanisms, and CMY is simply what printing uses.

    Hell, the blue morpho butterfly doesn’t even use pigment to turn blue. Its wings have tiny microscopic scales that trap light, and blue is the only wavelength short enough to get scattered by the rods and be reflected. It’s still subtractive color, but it isn’t using pigments at all.


  • I mean, you’re almost there, but then you lost the plot. I’m a professional lighting technician, and also happen to have a little bit of experience with paint.

    Light is additive color, and RGB is commonly used because your eyes have three different cones that detect colors. You have a red cone, a green cone, and a blue cone. So lights will tend to use the RGB color space because it allows the light to directly stimulate those three cones. If I shine RGB light at a white object, it will combine to reflect as white (meaning the object appears to be white) because the full spectrum is being reflected off of the object.

    But the actual colors used don’t really matter, as long as they add up to the full spectrum of light. I could use CMY light instead, and achieve the same basic effect. Again, if the full spectrum is hitting the object, the full spectrum has the potential to be reflected. And that potential is additive color… We add color to the system to achieve the color we want.

    Pigment (or really anything that absorbs/blocks light) is subtractive color. CMY(K) is commonly used in printing, but you could just as easily use RGB pigments instead. All that matters is that they’re selectively absorbing light, instead of reflecting it. If a pigment selectively reflects cyan light, (and absorbs all other wavelengths), it will appear as cyan when you hit it with white light. That absorption/blocking is subtractive color. We start with the full spectrum, and remove wavelengths to achieve the desired color.

    But the absorption isn’t actually what matters. What matters is that the light is selectively being reflected off of the object. Let’s say I have a pane of glass, which is coated with a special reflective material. This material will allow cyan light to pass through, while all other light gets reflected off.

    Now two things will happen if I shine white light at this glass: First, the glass itself will appear to shine red. That’s because when you selectively remove cyan light from the spectrum, it tints red. Since the cyan light is passing through the glass (instead of being reflected) we are effectively subtracting it from the glass’ reflection. So the glass appears red due to the subtractive color.

    Second, the light on the other side of the glass will appear to be cyan. Because the cyan light is selectively allowed to pass through that filter. This cyan light could be used for additive color mixing, and could be combined with beams of other spectrums (like magenta and yellow) to form white light.

    Now with this above system, we have the potential for both additive and subtractive color mixing, purely due to the properties of how the light interacts with the reflective material. Again, the specific color space isn’t what determines additive or subtractive, it is how the light is interacting in the system. And nearly every natural system will be using both. You’ll have additive color illuminating the room you’re in, then subtractive color selectively absorbing wavelengths to make different objects appear different colors.


  • That’s how you charge the Apple Mouse. They intentionally designed it so you couldn’t use it while it was charging, because Steve Jobs demanded a cord-free desk. He hated the cords leading to his mouse and keyboard, and didn’t think devices should stay plugged in all the time. So he forced the engineers to design a mouse that couldn’t stay plugged in.

    It really is the epitome of Apple’s “I know better than you” design philosophy


  • For some of us, that’s not a bad thing. I tend to burn my account and make a new one every year or two, just to minimize the accumulation of potential doxxing material.

    I also tend to swap things like my specific location when I talk about where I live. Pretty sure on just this one account I have comments saying I live in Texas, Oklahoma, and New Mexico. I’ll even change how I talk about my job. I work in live entertainment, but that’s a very broad category. I change details like how many seats my venue has, what my specific job is, (for instance, on this account I’m an audio technician), what my work history is like, what kinds of shows I tend to work, etc… All of them have grains of truth, (for instance, I have worked as an audio technician in the past, so I know what the job entails), but none are truly correct and all are red herrings in some way.





  • My father was frustratingly difficult to watch movies with, because of this exact thing. He would pause the movie to explain that the actor on screen had been in some other obscure movie a decade ago. It was especially bad if two actors had previously worked in the same project, because then he would start listing off other cast and crew they had worked with in the past.

    Okay, great, please press Play. I just want to watch the goddamned movie.