I was actually agreeing with you, in that running a private mail server is not a difficult endeavor as long as you take those things into account. Most VPS and CSP will block SMTP by default (just recently went through this with AWS, had to specifically request the service) since most everyone doesn’t have a clue how to secure mail relays and stay off blacklists.
Google, Live, AOL, Yahoo etc might hassle you for DKIM or SPF, but in my experience the ISP is the first hurdle.
Hah that’s a good point. Maybe they’ll make it so it lags just behind inflation.
If anything it’s the ISPs that will hassle you for outbound SMTP. There are ways around that but generally blocked by default
Surge pricing! You should have stocked up early
Legislators and executive branch will be exempt, of course
This is actually the sole reason I went with laser - I print so rarely that a traditional inkjet would not stand up to long periods of inactivity, as the ink wells would either dry up or the printer firmware would force replacement.
A monochrome laserjet should run you about the same price as an inkjet and cartridge refills (since the included inkjet cartridges won’t last long), and would probably suit 90% of most user needs. I highly recommend the Brother line of monochrome laser with duplexer, mine is 10 years old and going strong.
There are dozens of us!
I’ll be the first to admit that my technical experience in this field is limited, but I have been following the tech for some time.
Transparent display tech has come a long way since its inception, but from either a transparency standpoint or as a high fidelity interface for VR I can’t see how it’s a viable option. Given the choice I would much rather have a crystal clear UI with simulated AR than compromise display quality with adjustable transparency.
Why Apple chose to develop the googly-eyes outward-facing display is beyond me though. Maybe it looks better in person than in their promos.
AMAR - Ask Me About Rampart
I can relate to both sides of this fight, but to lend my POV on Apple’s stance, they have a valid argument.
When you sign the developer agreement and submit an app to the App Store, you are entering into a contract to make concessions to Apple’s business model, and Epic clearly violated these T&Cs.
If Epic truly wanted to institute change in App Store policies in order to maximize their profits from Fortnite, they would have first engaged Apple to initiate the discussion and work towards an amicable solution, which Apple would likely flat out deny. It’s at this point that Epic could have used its substantial presence in the industry to rally the developers, the press, and its own user base to stand up to Apple policies and effect that change.
As it stands, their decision to wait for their assured dismissal from the App Store to pursue litigation and position themselves as trying to “stand up for indie developers” comes off as insincere and primarily seeking publicity based on Apple’s action in simply abiding by its own long established policies.
Note: While I am primarily a Mac user in my personal life, I tend to be very critical of Apple’s business practices in general, and while I have my own negative opinions about Fortnite’s transactional model, I try to be unbiased in my response to their actions and subsequent behavior.
Uncle Tony is gonna do a little demo! We’re gonna rock GustavoM’s world
emacs?! set -o vi unless you just want to see the world burn
(I’m kidding, I use the emacs shortcuts in bash, but vim is my goto text editor)
What a brave corporate logo!