I couldn't post there because Reddit allowed the advertiser to lock the thread with no comments. The Ad is very flashy, it hurt my eyes within seconds, I'm not epileptic, but I am worried for those who are.
"Squarespace will honor all existing Google Domains customers’ renewal prices for at least 12 months after closing the acquisition, ensuring that domain hosting and management remains hassle-free."
It seems like there's no hurry to consider migrating yet.
If I do migrate:
- might consider Namecheap
- GoDaddy's renewal pricing I can't figure out
- Porkbun sounds too hipster for my tastes though I do like pork
- Cloudflare sounds altruistic but they want to get up all inside my domain's stuff with their proxying; I'm not sure if that could cause any issues with my Letsencrypt or other TXT records.
By default, Cloudflare tries to proxy your domains and subdomains, but there is a little switch next to each record that you can turn from orange to gray which will make it "DNS Only". So then, it is only a DNS record.
It's a little annoying but you definitely ARE NOT REQUIRED to use their proxies, but you are ENCOURAGED to.
Their dns management interface is pretty solid though and their API is top notch. Plus they have good support for DNS management through tools like Terraform, Pulumi, etc which most registrars won't offer. So there is a lot to like about CloudFlare. They do support a small set of TLDs for registration however, so keep that in mind (but of course if you register elsewhere you can always point it to cloudflare for DNS management).
The best DNS Management imho is AWS Route53. It expects technical knowledge, it isn't for someone setting up a squarespace site. But if you are very technical and want all the levers and power at your fingertips with great CLI, IaC, and API support (plus powerful GUI) then it is the best. Plus they have a ton of power features like georouting and roud-robin and other routing rules. But it comes at a cost of 50¢ a month, which to me is worth it but for some people they might prefer a completely free option.
But... with that being said, i wouldn't recommend registering a domain through AWS. Its really difficult to manage and the pricing is the highest in the industry (second only to GoDaddy's criminally predatory bait-and-switch renewal prices)
Shady business practices, generally horrible service.
I still don't understand how they maintain their market dominance. I only surmise that it must be non technically literate folks buying from them. They spend alot on marketing compared to the rest.
Porkbun is good. Hover is good. Gandi.net was good when I used them, but I've heard some rumblings of issues but I've never been able to fully substantiate, that said, they got bought out by a company that makes some justifiably wary.
Cloudflare is good if you don't mind using their nameservers only (they sell domains at cost, its a marketing vector for them).
I've used all of these directly and had no issues. If you want the most flexibility, I'd go with Porkbun or Hover. Being the most recent I've worked with, beside Cloudflare (which I loved, but some don't like being forced to use their DNS. you can turn the proxy stuff off), they were good experiences.
Haven't used Namecheap. I know some people like them, but also heard mixed reviews too, I'm always on the fence about them.
Yeah while this sale further tainted the little trust I had in Google, I'm not worrying about migrating quite yet. Squarespace does what they do very well, and I suspect they'll absorb this business of Google's seamlessly.
Now if they sold to, say, GoDaddy? I'd be in a rush to ditch the platform fast.
Namecheap is one of the worst. I keep saying here how I managed to persuade a rep to remove my MFA over chat and they didn't do proper auth. Look at NameBright - cheap and has a great new beta interface and it has an API as well.
I have a ton of domains on Namecheap and have been using them for 10-15 years. Their business has gone downhill significantly in the past 5 years or so.
The MFA is a joke. I recovered a client's MFA myself with almost no effort. It worked out since didn't properly set up MFA anyway and needed to get it unlocked and set up correctly, but I was shocked how easy it was to pretend to be someone with them. They disabled someone else's MFA with only me confirming a DNS record (which i looked up publicly using dig), plus the name and password of the account. It was scary easy.
At one point many years back they decided to stop supporting Authy as their MFA provider and tried to move everyone to their namecheap app, which would be used as a second factor. But the app was so terribly broken and I got locked out of my account multiple times because the app would crash on newer iPhones for a while, so I couldn't access my account. This must have been super common because they disabled MFA for me by just confirming a code sent to my phone. I assume this was a widespread problem and they might have eased up MFA deactivation rules for a time since there were probably a lot of people locked out of accounts.
Luckily now, they use mainstream 2FA codes, so you can use any app you want. But the process has already scarred me.
Overall, Namecheap has deteriorated to all the problems that Godaddy orginally had. The bait-and-switch renewal prices, clunky UI, slower nameservers, and upsells upsells everywhere for email hosting and everything else.
So after about 15 years of namecheap, I will be finding a new home sometime this year for all my domains.
IPv4+NAT still exposes your router's address, which is still problematic, no? If you want more privacy than that you can use a VPN, which should work on IPv6 too.
First, there's nothing overbearing about the Ubuntu install.
Second, Fedora uses rpm management, rpm repositories sooner or later corrupt themselves, happened to me and others I know on Red Hat, on Fedora and on SuSE.
I'd use Debian but I've found Ubuntu's driver management to be far more stable and reliable, especially for WiFi.
I was in Sasebo, Japan in the early 1980's and remember buying cold coffee in a can from a vending machine similar to buying a can of Coke in the States.
I've never used Tailscale or Mullvad, I do use a VPS and Wireguard that I configured and run. I'm wondering if people working at Tailscale or Mullvad could snoop on the traffic passing through their servers?
The context is whether it extinguishes the legal protections of the owner by making the barrier to sue extraordinarily high. Conversely, if you write something that is copyright protected under the law, would you be OK with Microsoft effectively stealing that protected work and sharing it with the world without even attribution to you as the original author?
> it extinguishes the legal protections of the owner by making the barrier to sue extraordinarily high
So then it supports the sharing of code for anyone to use freely, which is the opposite of the "extinguish" strategy that microsoft did in the past.
> would you be OK with Microsoft effectively stealing that protected work
I think that copyright protections are way way to strong and I support making almost all of them useless and I support allowing people to side step copyright protections.
This is because I want more creative works to be freely useable by everyone. Especially for AI purposes, which is a highly transformative and powerful usecase.
So, are you saying people should only obey the laws they agree with when those people feel they're morally justified higher than those who voted for the laws in the first place, because it's your opinion to do so or did I not grok what you are saying you support?
> So, are you saying people should only obey the laws
Depends on what the law is.
Also, this may not even be illegal. Maybe this is just a legal loophole, and people are obeying the law.
In which case I am very happy that Microsoft found a completely legal loophole that will cause more code to be shared.
So by " side step copyright protections", we could just say that this is a completely legal loophole that has the effect of allowing more code to be shared but does not overrule other laws.
According to my Google foo, around 1000 people per day have been moving to Texas in the last three years alone. Put anywhere between a half million to three quarters of a million additional people on the power grid in a three year span and the grid is bound to have issues.
Also, really like how the majority of the comments sound like Reddit /r/politics's far left, adult man child, ignorant insights.
The innovation here is to make that unidirectional rather than omnidirectional. So seems reasonable to conclude that even if the beam is gunshot noisy, outside the beam is basically silent.
Maybe I'm not understanding, but isn't this reflecting sound back, generated by something else? It seems the device uses one millionth the power, but the thing stimulating the device uses an unspecified amount, that would increase dramatically with distance. Unfortunately this is an MIT press release, so it will be impossible to understand what's actually going on.
> ... fix the input electrical power to 150 W ... The 20 dB DI transducers push the uplink decoding range up to several kilometers.
That probably is close to a baby whale fart, but I doubt competing systems are running at 150,000,000 W, as the above comment suggests. In their test to get 60m, they used 1.8W. 1.8 MW seems unlikely, for the same distance, with competing tech.
There's a fundamental misunderstanding of what's going on here. But, that's to be expected, with how these press releases are written.
This is asymmetric communication. The node itself uses backscatter thus operates at few micro-Watts. The remote acoustic projector is the 1.8W, and can communicate with 100s/1000s(?) of micro-watt power nodes - similar to RFIDs, but this tech works underwater.
I understanding that, but claiming that the backscatter energy, or the nodes power usage, is all the ocean life (the context of this comment chain) will see is incorrect, as the previous comment did. They primarily see the excitation energy, which appears to be ~23db greater (harvesting efficiency) than the backscatter, at the node. This is the same as something sitting between an RFID chip and the reader would.
So, the sea life near the transmitter would still have a bad time. The sea life near the nodes would see 23db more* than an active node, assuming the same power could be used to transmit from the node. Correct? This seems logical, since the energy harvesting will come at a coupling and efficiency cost, which means significantly more energy in the water at that node. If you had a battery powered node, you wouldn't need all the extra energy, and instead could just transmit.
All these numbers being thrown around are the power usage of the node, not what the sea life actually sees.
* Maybe more, since the signal path is twice as short, meaning your SNR starts higher at the midpoint (node).
Does it matter if it is generating the sound or just intentionally bouncing it back? It is still a source of unnatural sound that as of now has unknown affects on the natural inhabitants of the medium the sound is traveling. While you may think the hairless apes on the surface can do whatever they want regardless of repercussions, others of the hairless apes choose to be more conscientious of their effects on the surrounding environment.
There is no more information, as described in TFA, for reasons of this information having not been discovered yet by the researchers studying the new tech.
