You build your house in an area that is not governed by a building code. No permits, no inspections, do your own thing at your own risk. This generally means a rural area.
I was actually researching this with respect to the tiny house movement. They are out there. Definitely all rural, which can make it tough when you depend on fast internet to make a living.
It appears Hotz will now deploy his system in China, where the regulations on such devices are surely more lax. Looks like a good move for extended testing without pesky government scrutiny.
I was thinking the same thing...sure there are fewer regulations, but "death penalty" is not outside the realm of possibility for fucking this up in China.
1. Full manual control. I can dial in exactly the combination of f-stop and exposure that I want.
2. Manual focus. With a split-ring screen in the viewfinder, focus can be very precise and exactly where I want it. Both for getting the right part of the image sharp, and controlling depth of field.
3. Interchangeable prime lenses. Changing lenses makes a big difference in the results. Different lenses do different things: a fisheye, a wide-angle, a macro lense; each is really great in one particular area.
4. Lots of accessories. You can turn a DSLR into a decent rig for shooting pro quality videos or a low budget film, if that's your thing. You can add extra batteries, extra storage, and so on.
Mailchimp is a company that provides lots of unsolicited commercial emails. In other words, spam. You can dress it up and call it "marketing software for small businesses" but that doesn't change the essential fact: Mailchamp is a spammer. Is it any surprise that spamming is profitable?
I've received hundreds of Mailchimp emails. Not once did I sign up for any of those lists.
Does Mailchimp make it easy to unsubscribe? Sure. But that doesn't change the fact that they are spammers, and that if you want to send spam with some semi-plausible deniability that you're a spammer, Mailchimp is probably a good choice.
Of course, this story, like nearly all "business news" stories, is very likely the work of a highly paid public relations agency. That is one more reason that the word "spam" does not appear in this story.
I've got to disagree with you. I'd say MailChimp has elevated the perception of email marketing.
MailChimp has pretty strict standards when it comes to sending emails. If you send emails to a list that has a 20 percent or more bounce or unsubscribe rate, they'll freeze your account.
Other providers let you upload a CSV with emails and blast out campaign after campaign to purchased lists without repercussions.
I agree that MailChimp offers a legitimate service (sending subscriber newsletters and such) but also agree with GP that 90% of the email that I get via MailChimp I would call spam.
You know what? It's funny, because I have just realized that I do have
a spam detection rule about MailChimp. Until now I have thought it was kind of
software one runs to send out their spam, kid of like Perl or Python module
for SMTP. I have just learned that it is a service and it allows me, spam
victim, to unsubscribe. No fsckin' way I'll ever do that.
> If you send emails to a list that has a 20 percent or more bounce or unsubscribe rate, they'll freeze your account.
Without giving you a chance to do anything to correct that? What if it is a genuine case of non- spam? e.g. 100% signed up, soon after, 20% decide this list is not for them. Sometimes that might happen.
When you unsubscribe from a Mailchimp email, they ask the recipient why they are unsubscribing. If the recipient marks "I never subscribed" or "this email is spam," the threshold is probably much lower than 20 percent. The software tries to decide if your emails were malicious.
If your account is locked, then you have to call MailChimp and explain that your intentions weren't malicious and that you won't send anything else to those emails from your account.
I had a small email list that I had not sent anything in about a year and had my account locked after sending a campaign. People just forgot they were on the list, because it had been so long. Their support team unlocked it and suggested that I send an email at least every 6 months.
Anectdotal, but a non-profit volunteer org that I work with (http://cramba.org) had someone scrape all the contact emails from the site and sign them up for some mailings from a cycling tour company (http://kickassroadtrips.com/), sent via Mailchimp.
I directly reported this to Mailchimp itself, and based on both the response I got from Mailchimp and the angry response from the company owner I got a great feeling that Mailchimp took the abuse report quite seriously.
My experience is the exact opposite, I've received hundreds of MailChimp emails, and I HAVE signed up for every single one of them.
I have no doubt that some people do use MailChimp to send spam, but it seems to me that the majority of MC's customers are just sending to legit lists.
I don't think I've gotten any wholly unsolicited emails via Mailchimp or similar services. I still usually file them as spam because I hate that links they contain are obfuscated redirects -- for tracking purposes, but I'm much less agitated about that than the removal of link functionality -- I like seeing where I might click is likely to land me before clicking. If I happen to forget/not notice and mindlessly click on a link in an email, uBlock Origin helpfully blocks most such tracking links.
Providing tools for small-businesses ultimately means you're providing easy-access to people with few barriers
I think places like MailChimp are pretty easy to abuse for that reason. Compare that to an enterprise service provider where I need to commit to tons of upfront money in order to access the service and I need to manage my own reputation of my sending domain.
Even if you signed up for the mailing list in the first place? It's only spam if you never signed up for it in the first instance. If you sign up and then want to leave the list because the emails aren't relevant any more or too regular then that's just bad email marketing, not spam.
I have never signed up for a mailing list[1], e.g. gone to a "sign up for my newsletter" page and clicked "I would like to subscribe to your newsletter".
I've been signed up for them implicitly after making a purchase, etc., but I consider this spam and flag it as such.
Fair enough, that is spam in that case. Your initial comment didn't specify that you have never signed up for a mailing list (except for open source software, which is a mailing list) which I think puts you in the minority of people.
OSS mailing lists shouldn't be considered the same thing because I can send mail to them, and anyone else can as well. They are discussion forums carried out via email.
Mailing lists in the Mailchimp sense are just unwanted advertising in what I view as a communication medium - the equivalent of IRS scammer robocalls.
My "ive-done-nothing to-any-settings" email prevents me from spam in my IN box. So I suppose I never get any MC email.
Edit. Spam does not bother me any more. I only open email when I expect something. The only "interruptable" technology for me is a text. I have to look at it in my mind.
From the article: "It's important for professionals to be able to choose when and how they upgrade their software tools. With macOS, this is getting more and more difficult to do, and this is the main reason I want to leave the Mac ecosystem."
Of course, this is even more true of Windows 10, where Microsoft have decided they want to force updates on users on their chosen schedule - and of course just like with macOS, newer hardware can't run older versions of Windows. Have we reached the point where no major OS is suitable for actual, productive creative use?
OS X is still marginally better than the alternatives, but it's becoming increasingly flaky, and Apple's hardware support is a year or two short of a mass exodus to other platforms.
Win 10 is abhorrent in so many it's impossible to list them all. But it's increasingly usable and mostly stable. Some pro users can live with the horror. Others can't.
Linux is still a hobbyist, experimenter, and IT infrastructure OS. It's good at all the above, and it's being used for some creative pro applications. But it's not a straightforward option for anyone who just wants to get on with paid professional creative work.
It would be interesting if one of the main audio sequencers appeared on Linux. Bitwig is already there. But if (say) Ableton Live switched, it would start a mass stampede away from macOS.
Unfortunately Linux fragmentation makes that unlikely.
So - no, we do not currently have a rock solid no-nonsense OS for professional use, and it's looking less and likely that we'll have one any time soon.
I have a Powerbook G3, running Word 5.1 on OS 9. The sole function is "writing machine." It's around 20 years old, and still runs just fine. It's a lot more convenient than an IBM Selectric, although not quite as fast. The Selectric never lagged.
The "good bits" are things like Photoshop, Illustrator, and Quark.
Sure, I'm aware there are alternatives like Gimp and [whatever]. But the alternatives are kludges for edge case experts; and not for people who need to Get Stuff Done.
PS. I operate a FreeBSD server. It's great for that.
The 'good bits' of OSX is that there is no such a thing as 'drivers' from the users perspective.
If you have to use the word 'driver' - it's not user friendly.
If you have to 'build' anything - it's not user friendly.
99% of people want to use their apps - even most devs just want a clean, stable, bug-free, well documented and consistent platform to develop on.
I have nothing against any of the unix flavours - all the power to them, but I'm not sure that these kinds of articles are hitting the mark when it comes to anything remotely resembling mass adoption.
Free BSD is not a 'product' really, I would argue that it's 'technology'.
The 'good bits' of OSX is that there is no such a thing as 'drivers' from the users perspective.
Well, unless you buy some hardware that is not from Apple. Buy a 802.11ac USB stick (because your Mac has 802.11n and you cannot upgrade the hardware) with Mac drivers. The vendor decides to release a (buggy) driver update for El Capitan half a year after it's released.
Pretending that the driver problem does not exist on macOS does not make it go away.
You make a good point and don't deserve the downvotes. Some OS projects don't aim for mass desktop adoption, although I'm sure all would like more visibility and users.
The barrier to entry for most UNIX-related tools is quite high for "non technical" users. I don't think that's a controversial thought. And one can hardly deny that some UNIX users like that i.e. if you can't read the MAN pages and figure it out, then perhaps UNIX isn't for you.
Some other good bits: development tools (malloc_history, spindump, leaks, crash logs, panic logs, dSYMs, powermetrics), security (code signing, ASLR, Time Machine), system APIs (Mach ports, XPC, launchd).
Nope. There were some patches but it never made it in somehow.
I think it's worse there's no sandboxing. Ports just runs all kinds of code downloaded off the internet as root. Latest version does have the very beginnings of some in Capsicum but it's not like OS X where every daemon is syscall and FS sandboxed.
The lesson is obvious: host your most important content on your own server that you control; and make backups.
Some people will say that self-hosting isn't a practical solution. But when the alternative is the potential for devastating data loss, it seems eminently reasonable.
More practically, or instead of and will suffice. That is, if you lack the expertise to set up your own server, it's okay to use someone else's provided you also keep local backups of all your work. For most people, keeping local backups is far more practical than running your own server.
since reading the prag prog book a decade ago, I started putting everything I can in version control. saved my ass several times so far. used
my own svn server for a while, now using a combination of GitHub and AWS git (I think it's called codesource)
It has been like 14 years since I've had my own physical server in a data center. I don't think self-hosting is a thing anymore for individuals. Today with my symmetric FIOS I could host at home. But then I risk having Verizon pull the plug on my internet if they disapprove of something I post.
Now if by "self-host" you mean to host with a company that doesn't have AI bots scanning for objectionable content, I guess you could host anywhere EXCEPT the big boys. But consider that Google, etc could be providing the AI bot service to anyone and everyone (I'm sure there's a market), so I'm not sure that any form of self-host can really protect you.
So the answer is a) control your own domain, b) backups
The current Mac Pro officially supports 64GB and 3rd parties offer upgrades to 128GB.
Even the 2006 models can be upgraded to 32GB.