You can view lessons in "reference mode" -- to get there, just click on the old task and then on the name of the topic.
You can also get there from the Table of Contents -- to get there, go to your dashboard (where your learning tasks are), click on the name of your course in the top-left, and you'll be brought to a screen that says "Course Sequence" with a list of courses on the left and units on the right. If you expand the units, you'll see topics, and you can click on a topic to view its lesson in reference mode.
Note that XP & knowledge credit is only awarded for completing learning tasks on your dashboard, not for anything you do within a lesson in reference mode.
Not sure, but looking at the interface myself just now, it seems like it's always possible to see the latex of a math field by either
1) right-click > show math as > tex commands (which you can copy/paste), or
2) hover over the field and see the tex commands show up as hover text (but can't copy/paste)
Yes, but it's not included in the upstream Ubuntu security repository. In fact, it's not available via any repository AFAIK. It updates itself via fetching new versions from CrowdStrike backend according to your update policy for the host in question. However, as we've learned the past days, that policy does not apply to the "update channel" files...
People say this like it lets Apple off the hook. Let me explain why it doesn't.
Apple had full control over the whole phone's software stack, in a very good way, meaning they built a good mobile OS that had good systems for power management and an app lifecycle that could actually kill apps at will to maintain efficiency, without disrupting the user.
With this, they decided to ship smaller batteries so they could make slimmer phones.
Except, they used garbage batteries. They were so small (1600mAh on the iPhone 6) that normal wear and tear of a few years degraded them to the point that the battery chemistry could not keep up with normal processor frequency and power ramping.
Apple started getting a lot of complaints because people were understandably upset that their 2-3 year old phone couldn't run for more than an hour off the charger. Apple didn't like increasing support load, even though they weren't covering anyone's battery replacement. Instead of putting out a press release that they had shipped sub-standard batteries in their phones, and offering free battery replacements with a new battery that wouldn't have the same problem in another 2-3 years, they included code in the new version of iOS to SIGNIFICANTLY slow down your 3 year old or less phone.
Apple made a product that deteriorated way too quickly, and then tried to hide it. That's batterygate. If LG sold a fridge that would die after five years because of compressor fatigue and then silently updated their fridges to not operate colder than 45 degrees F to extend the life of the compressor, I would hope you would be pissed at that, right?
A reminder that the iPhone 6 was also "Bendgate", which internal apple memos showed they knew was a serious problem before they sold it, and then claimed two years after release they only had 9 complaints of phone bending and that it wouldn't bend in normal use.
> If LG sold a fridge that would die after five years because of compressor fatigue and then silently updated their fridges to not operate colder than 45 degrees F to extend the life of the compressor, I woul
Apple sycophants are willing to put up with any bullshit from Apple. It is very tiresome to argue against blind faith.
Any other company would face incredible scrutiny if that happened. Imagine if MS did that to their surface devices. And this level of scrutiny from consumers is healthy.
It has a simple reason, any other device is much worse. All my Lenovo laptop batteries died in 2 years, meanwhile my MacBook from 2015 still gets 3 hours of battery life. That one was expensive, but now with Apple Silicon the Macbook has best power to performance ratio by far.
And it's not like other vendors are not full of crap either. I had a Dell laptop with a clearly broken display that they never acknowledged or repaired - and many other problems of all kinds. Apple was always least (but obviously not zero) problems and best build quality.
> It has a simple reason, any other device is much worse. All my Lenovo laptop batteries died in 2 years
Pff. I had a macbook battery (2018 model, brand new, issued by my employer at the time) that died in 1.5 years. Died in the sense that I couldn't use that crap unplugged for more than 10 minutes.
Since every place I work issues me a MacBook, I am very experienced with these luxury toys, and I wouldn't ever buy one for myself. I actually think Thinkpads are much better.
As I said, it's obviously not zero issues with Apple either. But this particular issue is an exception imho, my own experience and everyone with a Mac around me is saying the battery lifetime is much better than any other brand they tried. Also, 1.5 years is below 2 years of warranty (in EU) - if you're around here, try to have it replaced. I had only good experience with Apple customer care - much better than HP, Dell and Lenovo. Again, while it wasn't always perfect and sometimes required visiting again, at least they really wanted to help - unlike the other vendors.
BTW you're saying it was 2018 model, and employer issued, so if I'm correct in assuming it was a top model Intel CPU, these really were chewing through the batteries because of the heat. It's very different with i5, less powerful i7 and Apple Silicon.
I really don't think anyone is claiming that Apple is perfect - it's just that the experience with other vendors is so, so utterly bad. For example ThinkPads - nice performance and cheap, I give you that. But the non-existent customer care (for consumers, not enterprise), the build quality, the bad sound and displays and the absolutely terrible touchpad make me avoid it. Also Windows - and I never got Linux properly working on a ThinkPad as well as MacOS does on a MacBook, even though they claim it's Linux certified.
Yeah there should definitely be a better governance structure preventing employee access without a structural justification like a law enforcement request, customer service request, etc.
As an owner of a model Y, I’m beyond pissed off they’re so lackadaisical with this stuff, to the point where I may just buy a different car.
> to the point where I may just buy a different car.
I love this line of rhetoric. Seriously, I doubt that you will. If you consider all of the shenanigans that Tesla is known to do, you shouldn't have bought the car if you're concerned about privacy. Any car that has cameras on the car that looks at the interior of the car should not have been purchased in the first place. OF COURSE they will be looking at video when they shouldn't be. Has there ever been an example of a company that hasn't? Ring has done it. Roomba has done it. Open it to any data not just camera, and people like Uber have used that data for nefarious purposes.
Any device that sends back data to the home office is just too ripe for misuse. Then, when it comes out in examples like this that it has occured, there is 0 liability for the company involved. Maybe the company makes an example out of the employees in various ways up to dismissal, but the company just shrugs it off.
You can decouple the encryption and decryption keys such that the private key would never be present in any Tesla system at any point in time[1]. And you can introduce a ratchet such that compromising the Tesla car at time t0 would not enable the attacker to decrypt any encrypted data at t[n < 0].
Updating a car with a new key would fix both problems. Old recordings would be lost, of course, but customers hearing "I can't unlock that without your old key" may be necessary to re-establish trust.
Absolutely and that is why you can't use an HSM. Thankfully generating keys on device and storing them on the cloud account encrypted by a passcode works. As the keys are a predictable size you can encrypt them multiple times with different passcodes.
If it's not one of your core goals from the very start of your design, it's pretty hard to build a system where employees can't access data. Obviously you can do it, but it's not trivial and it's doubly not trivial to add after the fact.
Before it was just like on windows with a graphics card that holds the compute relevant data.
Now they have two cards with different memory bandwidths and ideally you would want to combine them of some sorts instead of wasting the whole m2 ultra gpu
The original comment and every reply reads like it was copied straight from a marketing brief. This is everyone's reminder that Hacknernews is not immune to astroturfing, and it's often done much more subtly.
