Hah, I had one of those. I paid $50 for a "lifetime email service" that later they wanted me to pay monthly for, so I had to bid goodbye to my null.net address
I have had an apple id problem myself, for the past N years. Mine is an old mac.com account, which has my Gmail address as the backup email (and the primary one now that mac.com isn't doing email anymore). Because of this, I cannot sign up for a new account with my Gmail (it is tied to the older mac.com account).
I've managed to reset the password, but I must answer a security question to log in. I mean, I answered those security questions probably a decade ago and I do not know what they are anymore. You can reset your security questions, but to do that you need to use an iPhone (last one I owned was a 4) that is still logged in, or, answer a security question. Which is as we established, the problem.
So every couple of months I log in, try a few other possible answers, get them wrong, and get locked out for a bit.
Anyway, I need to get this fixed my march, due to apple being the formula one streamer in my country now, so I have to actually solve the problem of logging in to my apple account. Or, I guess, making another random email just so I can watch f1. Sigh.
But if anyone knows how to reset security questions, I'd love to know. I would way rather pay apple actual money than go back to torrenting the races.
It sounds like you unfortunately have gotten yourself kinda stuck, but I very much sympathize. I too have an account dating back to iTools, and for a long time it was a major frustration that I was stuck with that original email address as unchangeable for the Apple ID, unlike newer accounts. However, some time in the last, I dunno 3-5 years maybe? I can't remember now the exact time I noticed, but after over a decade of requests and fading hope Apple actually did allow me to change the email address for that Apple ID, which I shifted to my own domain. So for anyone else who hasn't checked in a long time, worth noting situation might be marginally better now.
Re: "mac.com isn't doing email anymore", all the original mac.com email addresses still work fine. Apple has played around with various domains (mac.com/me.com/icloud.com) over their decades of bumbling with online services but they made them all interchangeable for older users, mails to the original @mac.com emails still go through. Even originally made aliases (they allowed 5 with iTools) still work. Not sure what your issue was on that one.
Finally yeah, ""security"" questions are one of those horrible legacy anti-patterns that I will cheer to see finally be dead and buried. If you try to answer them honestly probably anyone can learn it with a bit of online searching, if you go for more obscure stuff they're easy to forget defeating the purpose. It's really best just to treat them as extra passwords, use random alphanumeric values and keep them in your password manager same as the password. Apple has also fumbled around with recovery over the years, at one point you had options to have a manual recovery key you could save but I think that's dead and can't set it up after already forgetting. Maybe if you go in person to a store with physical ID and evidence, if you had payment associated with the account and have that credit card for example that might do it.
If you have nothing of value tied to the account though probably no reason not to just abandon it.
youremail+anystring@gmail.com will always redirect to youremail@gmail.com Before making a random email address, try using youremail+f1@gmail.com or something similar.
For a while you could write OSX stuff in Java. I did. They also had some pretty okay JNI bindings for stuff like quicktime, so I was able to write a java application that used quicktime to load and display videos. I needed to analyze video streams for my dissertation, so I wrote some custom visualization stuff in java that used the quicktime bindings. Good times.
Looking forward to the highway expansion next. I had to get from mountain view to san francisco yesterday, and waymo was _able_ to do this trip, it was going to take several hours and get routed up el camino real the whole way. Luckily I was standing very close to a caltrain station when I needed the ride, so i just caltrained, and then waymo'd from the SF station to where i needed to be.
BTW, this is the way: Assuming nothing exceptional, with the every-half-hour or better frequency, I use Waymo to get to a Caltrain station, take Caltrain to a nearby stop, and then Waymo from there to destination.
It would be dope if the Waymo app, given that it knows the travel times via Google maps transit and your location, could arrange this for you so you walk right into a waiting Waymo the moment your train arrives, and the whole thing could be routed as one trip in the app.
Highway expansion is already here in many areas! Waymo has been laying the groundwork for this rapid rollout for so many years and it's amazing to see it all come together.
Waymo's usually something like 50% more expensive than Lyft in SF, in my experience. But the drivers don't tailgate, have colds, listen to your conversation (AFAIK)...I'll generally opt for Waymo now if I have a choice. The biggest problem I have is that it's usually a longer wait due to the smaller fleet size, but if I'm planning ahead, I'll just book one for a given time, and that takes care of it.
Lyft from MV to SF is like $100 I think? It's definitely not enjoyable but for Bay Area prices it's not ruinously expensive.
You /should/ be able to save by using shared rides, but in practice when I tried the driver was so mad they just dumped me on the side of the road and I had to call and get a refund.
The new Caltrain schedule isn't half bad though, if it came twice as often on the weekends we'd be cooking.
Are you a Waymo tester? I haven't gotten Bay Area access yet despite it being released, and when I checked with support they were just like "oh we lied, it's for trusted testers only."
I dug up my email and found they'd sent me the tester application form like a year ago and I just forgot to fill it out, so maybe they'll let me in sometime.
(Also, the chat claimed the support agent was named Al Pacino. Unless it was a pun on AI and I just couldn't tell with the font.)
Yeah, I think the actual underpinning support that broke this time is recission. In the past, of congress passed a budget with money for the some department or line item, that money would be spent. Now the president has claimed that he doesn't have to spend money he had been directed to spend by finding bills, and (importantly) the supreme court has upheld this stance.
This means that there is no longer the ability to negotiate a budget in good faith. The Dems can fight for more health care funding (or whatever) and the compromise can happen, and then the president can just say "sike!" And not do it.
And, political leanings aside, this president has shown that he will indeed break any agreement he decides to, so there doesn't seem to be any reason to negotiate. So I'm thinking this shutdown lasts a Long time.
Impeachment. Negotiations should start with impeachment. The President is not faithfully executing the laws passed by Congress, and the Supplicating Council has decreed that the only remedy is impeachment. It's time to impeach and convict.
Well yes, the follow up to my point is that every member of Congress who is not currently supporting impeachment/conviction is complicit in this abject failure of governance.
Congress has had problems for decades (thanks to Newt and the childish boomers), which is what has been accreting so much power in the Presidency to begin with. But there is still time to pull up by Congress reasserting its authority as an institution, and that time is now.
The balance shifts after the midterms, even if the Republicans win big.
Then the president is on his way out, and Republicans start looking for and building favor with the next person.
(Which is really what all the "third term" BS is about. Trump has no intention, age-wise, of running for a third term, but talking about it keeps the lame duck calculus on ice. Hence why there aren't any details about "how", just a vague "we have a plan")
I think the top level comment really sets a great context for discussing this. The Republican goal has been to destroy, part out, and sell off our Constitutionally-limited government. Whether the government is nominally "shut down" or not doesn't really matter to that overall plan.
So yes, this is not going to be resolved in a matter of weeks. But something has to happen in order for it to resolve one way or another, and one of those possibilities (that you should be championing if you appreciate our Constitutionally-limited government!) is for Congress to start exerting their authority independent of Dear Leader's grip on the Party.
It's one of the very few remaining in-system ways for the Constitutional US Government to continue existing. So yes, I would say it's worth banging that drum again. Maybe Susan Collins has even learned a lesson of her own.
> and (importantly) the supreme court has upheld this stance
Caveat: on a preliminary basis in most of the decisions
Important to differentiate SCOTUS saying "there isn't a compelling reason to block this power before we decide" and "here's our decision about the legality of this power"
I'm half-curious if Roberts is playing for time to avoid a constitutional crisis, figuring it's better to cede a temporary power (and avoid the executive stuffing the bench or whatever insane shit they'd try) than to cast it in case law. Not great for the rule of law, but I can see the realpolitik (which Marbury v. Madison shows has always been a consideration for inter-branch squabbles)
I presume that the court knows what it is doing, which is playing a partisan game. Last administration it invented a whole new legal doctrine (major questions) to fabricate a way to block the biden agenda, this administration it is doing its best to give the trump administration a huge amount of power _without_ ceding that power indefinitely to the next administration via precedent.
The Roberts courts is in on this. They know Trump won't last forever and when he's gone, they get Vance to carry on with their Dominionist project. People need to stop thinking that the branches are playing realpolitik games... the various Republicans are either all in on Christofascism or they're fooling themselves that they're not, or they're too spineless to fight back.
Yeah, I think too many people (especially dem leadership, but also a lot of centrist Republican voters) are waiting for things to "go back to normal."
There's a kind of mental trap (Frances Fukuyama and the end of history) where you consider the modern liberal capitalist democracy an attractor state of such strength that anything like the current admin is a temporary aberration,that we can wait it out.
And just like the market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent, I think the populist demagogue class can retain power longer than the liberal institutions can endure. I certainly hope I'm incorrect about this.
Recalling congressional representatives is probably not allowed. AFAICT, however, there has never been a federal court ruling on the (likely) exclusive right of congress to expel members.
The closest I could find was Burton v. U.S., where the court declined to rule, since the law in question didn't apply to senators at the time.
> Now the president has claimed that he doesn't have to spend money he had been directed to spend by finding bills, and (importantly) the supreme court has upheld this stance.
So this means the Supreme Court has unilaterally implemented the line item veto ? So much for "balls and strikes" eh.
While this is true, I've dealt with a sudden battery failure on my old model ebike (a kalkhoff from 2018 or so) and I can tell you that without any motor assist the bike might as well be stationary. It is quite heavy.
This is also fascinating from the perspective of me, someone who is autistic and open about it at work. My work collaboration profile comes out and says "I'm autistic", and sets out a few things to know.
When I hit the workspace rearrangement event I felt it in my bones, since my employer did that. However because I have a doctor's note about my noise and light sensitivity, they were able to accommodate me with a dedicated desk in a quieter area.
It isn't the quietest, and I still get shuffled around, but I get to preview the new location and pick the best spot for my sensitivities each time I've moved. So in my case, being open with my management (and reports) about my autism has been a very helpful thing.
It is a little annoying that I had to install this in order to remap the capslock key on my laptop to a control key. That's all I use from powertoys, but I guess I'm glad it is at least feasible.
These little front-back symmetric buses (as well as engineering-outfitted minivans) are pretty common in the mission in SF as well. I see them all the time in a very small (four or so blocks around 16th and folsom where my pottery studio is) area, but I think they're all still just test driving.
As a waymo user, I'm looking forward to a little more competition in the market. I quite like waymo, but driving price down woudl be great.
The pricing wave Waymo went through is interesting.
After the limited access you’d often find them offering same or cheaper rides than Uber/Lyft. People tried them and realized they arrive without the whiplash you get from a start/stop Tesla uber in SF, no smells, no weird interactions. Every person we talked to prefers the Waymo even with its quirks and getting stuck sometimes.
Now waymo is 3x uber every time I check it.
I’ve gotten rides across the city for $6 on Uber, not sure what driver is making any money at that rate. Per hour you’re much better off working at In and out.
I was a TL and then a TLM in my org, and am now an EM. I'm actually pretty happy about it, personally. I am organizing an eng summit tomorrow between my team and a sibling team (which is onsite and visiting from elsewhere) in my org, and I noticed that about 18 months ago, I would have been the person to give 4 out of the 5 main talks at the summit (as the expert / TL on that system). Now it's five different eng. This tells me I've been able to nurture / elevate the other engineers on the team, get them all into technical leadership roles, and then have them reach out and be ready to talk about their work to other teams.
Overall: this is a good thing. By taking up less room on the technical side, I've replaced one of me with four strong engineers. Previously, I was split between TL work and EM work and as a result, did a half job of each, leaving too much un-done.
The other thing I'll note is that engineers are basically the only role with this distinction. Product Managers, Program Managers, Sales, Marketing, all those roles seem to combine management with seniority. Only on the engineering side do we have both a TL and Manager hierarchy (while typically the TLs for a team report to the same manager that the line manager for the team does, they exert authority differently). This works out okay on the eng side when there is a strong alliance between the TLs and the EMs, but that doesn't always happen.
