There's really two ways, the other is to manage your own CA. But it seems like every browser/piece of software/etc out there is hell bent on making that as difficult as possible. It'd also be nice if it was easier to scope a certificate authority to a specific domain, but support for that is pretty patchy which is functionally the same as no support at all. And that's not to mention software that ignores the system certificate store. Or how tedious and nonstandardized it can be to get a trusted certificate store in a Docker container in cases where you have services that need to trust each other. Or how annoying it is to install your own trusted CA on devices (though, step-cli does help a lot at least on normal computers... phones however...). On and on and on, the barriers to what should be the obvious solution are extremely high.
Pfsense or OPNsense can handle ~5 gbps routing/firewall on a low power AMD or Intel embedded chip. My now old Pfsense box I got off Aliexpress can comfortably handle 2.5 gbps on an ancient Celeron J4125 running around 10W total. 10+ gbps is feasible on a reasonable power budget with higher end hardware, though it starts to get more expensive.
Damnnnnn that's cool but ouch. I know you're really buying the whole platform and capability and flight-worthy certification but $2K for what is basically a wifi dongle still makes my head spin.
It was still small enough to be relevant but yes. The level of integration Valve can do with the steam box probably actually lowers the total cost for them a bit versus just comparing against individual component cost, so it buys them a bit of margin but probably not a ton in today's market.
It was also missing the ability to wake from the controller, I wonder if we will see that become a feature on other gaming Linux distros? I'm not super clear on why that isn't already possible.
Linus Tech Tips did a video a few days ago where they built a DIY Steam box for the same price. What they came up with was a decent improvement on the GPU but not a massive upgrade. Kinda suggests Valve isn't necessarily selling them at a loss but the margins are probably near zero.
To be fair, "boffin" usually implies someone has relevant (usually scientific) expertise, but nerd doesn't. Henry Legg has the relevant credentials to give weight to his claims, he's not just some random basement nerd.
Never went away, Linux is now the primary target platform for OpenZFS (which is basically synonymous with ZFS these days). TrueNAS/iXSystems (probably the main commercial company using ZFS) moved from FreeBSD to Linux. Major new features like pool expansion have been added after years of requests. Etc., it's a good time for ZFS on Linux.
There ARE licensing issues related to shipping it compiled into the kernel, but you can install it as a kernel module on every mainline distro nowadays which is functionally the same from a user perspective.
I've bought a good bit of 10Gtek stuff over the years. Not sure to what extent they actually are designing their products vs. just acting as a reseller (I think the latter), but either way everything I've bought from them has been quality kit that lasted for years, at a great price.
This also got me on my partner's Macbook. For the longest time I couldn't figure out why I could access my local services on (Safari? I forget which one actually worked) but not on Firefox/Chrome.
The specs are underwhelming, but I could see the value to a beginner being in the software that accompanies it tightly integrated with parts kits and instructions. I'd honestly prefer to see a logic analyzer instead of a mediocre oscilloscope; I feel like the projects that most people learning want to do these days are digital, and simple logic analyzers are more amenable to being cheap while still being useful.
Yeah, I certainly have my complaints about systemd but the parent's point is undermined by the fact that cron still works. If you prefer it, carry on I doubt seriously it's going anywhere. I still do sometimes.
Yeah, one of my bigger complaints especially on the Nano was the GPU only had really limited model support (iirc, mostly tflite but maybe I'm misremembering) and it sounds like the newer ones are more normal. That and what seems from the docs to be better headless support would be major improvements. Going further to mainline distro support would make them interesting to me again.
I was always disappointed by the Nano as it was a pretty capable device, but it seemed like not many people picked it up as a platform for cool things which I always attributed to the software.
Nvidia's software platform for the whole Jetson series was, at least in my experience, absolutely awful on the Jetson Nano and Orin boards I worked on. Has that improved at all? I did not appreciate that the only option they provided was a full desktop version of ancient Ubuntu... and even flashing the OS image was a bizarre process.
Edit: looks like they at least have a better headless option now.
Rocky's docs are also really nice. They aren't as thorough as RedHat's, but they're much more readable and concise, and tend to be written for a less enterprise-y audience.
I agree, it's far from pointless. The 538 model is arguably close to the best you can do considering how difficult the task is, but it's important to understand it as purely a reflection of the polling data (and 538's reliability scores for polls), and that polling data is inherently flawed. After all, there are only 2 ways to perform a perfectly accurate poll: either know the outcome a priori, or run the election. We shouldn't be too surprised when models like 538 fail to correctly predict the outcome, because that's not what they represent. It's an analytical tool for understanding the current state of polling.
The real caveat is that 538 was a Monte Carlo model, and is only as good as its inputs. "Here's what the current spread in polling numbers is *given our model and the current polling and their reported uncertainties.*" Polling uncertainties are themselves computed under certain models, and those models are subject to errors. I don't think 538 hid this, but it's a difficult caveat for people to reason about because the sorts of modeling errors that have the most influence usually represent "unknown unknowns".
Compact HF/shortwave radios with transmit capability exist, but they're pretty expensive and are generally definitely portable but not quite handheld. The biggest user of such equipment is the military, so a lot of the tech is engineered for that with civilian/amateur use as an afterthought. ICOM, Yaesu, and Xiegu are probably the best known makers, and you're looking at ~$1000 as table stakes for a modern one, though there are some slightly cheaper options.
Handheld CB radios do exist and are cheap, but I've never really used them.
Analog handhelds are still abundant, they've gotten smaller and more efficient but older ones are still basically just as good as new. IMO digital handhelds are superior, but digital protocols are much more fragmented so analog remains king as a common denominator (practically every digital handheld can do analog, too).