Readit Newshttps://www.owc.com/solutions/thunderbolt-dock
It's a poor imitation of old ports that had screws on the cables, but should help reduce inadvertent port stress.
The screw only works with limited devices (ie not the Mac Studio end of the cord) but it can also be adhesive mounted.
See for example:
Well, that's the theory at least. In practice it's more accurate to say that Micron had cut down their consumer allocation that not even their factory brand can get enough chips to survive.
Sure would be nice if people used IPv6. Even if you're actually sending data over IPv6, that doesn't mean the DNS lookups are going over IPv6. Infrastructure like that lags.
> This has been a flagged issue in DNSSEC since it was originally considered. This was a massive oversight on their part and was only added because DNSSEC originally made it quite easy to probe entire DNS trees and expose obscured RRs.
... probably because the people who originally designed DNSSEC (and DNS) couldn't believe that people would be crazy enough to try to keep their DNS records secret (or run split address spaces, for that matter). But anyway, whatever the reason, the replies are big and that has to be dealt with.
> Fair enough but are network clients actually meant to use DNSSEC?
You should be validating as close to the point of use as possible.
> Isn't this just an issue for authoritative and recursive DNSSEC resolvers to and down the roots?
If by "resolvers" you mean "local resolution-only servers", then that's common, but arguably bad, practice.
Anyway, using TCP also neuters DNS as a DoS amplifier, at least if you can make it universal enough to avoid downgrade attacks.
I wonder if it's time to just retire this mechanism. In 2025 you'd have to be crazy to not use encryption with an internet-facing host, which in practice usually means TLS, which means your hostname is already logged in Certificate Transparency logs and trivially enumerated.
> which is what Google etc have been trying to do for years but this would just completely fast track that.
Excuse me? They have done that for years. There's nothing to "fast track" here. Big Tech already implemented surveillance.
The EU age verification solution says implementations SHOULD implement[1] their ZKP protocol[2]. Not linking it to the user is stated as an explicit goal:
Unlinkability: The goal of the solution is to prevent user profiling and tracking by avoiding linkable transactions. Initially, the solution will rely on batch issuance to protect users from colluding RPs. Zero-Knowledge Proof (ZKP) mechanisms will be considered to offer protection. More details are provided in Section 7.
[1]: https://ageverification.dev/av-doc-technical-specification/d...
[2]: https://ageverification.dev/av-doc-technical-specification/d...
A great example of this is the Korean War, where a British brigadier in an extremely difficult situation told an American general "Things are a bit sticky, sir" - who interpreted it as "Could be better, but we're holding the line". The misunderstanding resulted in 500 dead and captured.
I doubt those were particularly profitable, but there was a lot of innovation back then.
Moreover, why risk installing a 3rd-party keyboard app when the App Store is filled with adware and malware? All those handy flashlight and camera apps are a Trojan's Horse, why should one assume that the various keyboard apps in the App Store aren't keyloggers trying to steal my login info?
In 2025 I can do mostly error-free blind typing on the Pixel 7 keyboard, with all autocorrect and predictive spelling intentionally turned off. Why would I need innovation?
Using more smaller nodes means your cross-node IO is going to explode. You might save money on your compute hardware, but I wouldn't be surprised if you'd end up with an even greater cost increase on the network hardware side.