Generally the elastic or usage/volumetric type billing structures are used on SaaS/cloud products, not on-prem.
Although it’s entirely possible that elasticsearch, and other vendors in the space use that pricing model for their on-prem customers.
Regardless, that’s even more of a reason why it would be very difficult to give a quote without being first having a presales meeting with a solution architect or knowledgeable rep.
This company may be dogshit, but seat count is the standard licensing structure for most employee facing business software, including on-prem.
Most business software licensing/CRM tools requires that information to generate a quote, as price will be dependent upon several factors, including volume licensing tiers i.e. volume discounts.
Sometimes, licensing structures are simple enough that an employee or rep might be able to give you a quick ballpark without that information, but that would be the exception, not the rule.
And all of that is assuming that pricing is only based on seats, when there could be a whole lot of other variables that would be required even for their system just to generate single quote e.g. core count, support terms, etc.
To be clear, none of that means anyone should trust, or switch back to, elasticsearch. It’s just a minor peak into the mundane horrors of business software licensing.
I mean, Voice of America is explicitly a state funded propaganda organization used to advance American interests abroad.
I think the confusion most people have is that they incorrectly believe that propaganda means lies , it doesn’t.
Propaganda is information published and used to influence opinions and actions. Doesn’t matter if it’s accurate, or inaccurate, information.
So yeah, VOA is a US government run propaganda outlet. While it doesn’t mean that they’re some dystopian disinformation factory, they also aren’t typically breaking news either, so I would recommend using alternative sources without that baggage.
Everyone hating on that setup are a bunch of morons.
There’s a good reason to put your patch panels on a separate rack then all of your switches like that, because eventually you’ll have to roll them around. At which point, you’re going to need some slack in the lines, like when you’re hooking up a tow line to your hitch.
That’s all I see here: preparedness. Separate racks for switches and patch panels, and a lot of slack for when you got to roll them around, or some shit I don’t know.
I just know that I see foresight and planning when I look at that picture, not sure why everyone else doesn’t.
Yeah dude, by all accounts it does seem that the paranoia and power went to his head.
Don’t get me wrong, he’s a pioneer and a visionary for what he did, but I have yet to read any credible account that discredits his attempt at purchasing hitmen.
Currently, hydrogen production requires more energy to produce the equivalent amount of hydrogen.
Which is why it should not be produced on a fossil fuel based grid, but is perfect for stored portable energy on renewable grids. For example, converting excess wind and solar power to hydrogen fuel.
It sounds like Estonia is on the right track, and intending to leverage their access to water and other renewables to generate “green” hydrogen. This sounds great, I hope they can pull it off.
What do you mean go wrong?
All of the “consequences” that would arise from a program like this, are intentional.
The implication is that Apple’s language is very specifically implying this is a fee-for-service product, but that they are waiving that cost for a defined time period. They may extend that again, or several more times, but they are going out of their way to NOT say it’s just free, or simply an included feature e.g. FindMy.
If their intent was to have it be an included service, they would NOT include the language about how long it will remain free.
The only context to view their language (extending free year) is that they intend to switch to some form of a paid model i.e bundled or standalone.
I’m not commenting on whether that’s good, or bad, just that it’s clearly what they are planning on doing. Otherwise, they wouldn’t use that specific language.
You just answered your own question. How many users click approve without thinking? How many install Xposed modules that intentionally, or unintentionally, create security issues?
I didn’t say rooting will break your security, just that it can. Rooting exponentially increasing the attack surface, which for some users isn’t a concern, but for your average user, it probably should be.
In this case, this person wanted to increase his privacy, which is why I recommended what I did.
Also, FWIW, there’s a reason why GrapheneOS and DivestOS specifically design their ROMS to NOT be rooted and to RELOCK the bootloader.
Rooting can harm the security of your device, significantly.
I understand you’re wanting to root for privacy reasons, and I’m not saying you should never root, just understand the risks.
Instead, I’d suggest keeping your Pixel and installing GrapheneOS.
Or, find another phone that is supported by DivestOS.
Both of those ROMs are privacy and security hardened and relock your bootloader for a secure boot.
No, because the barrier to entry for car manufacturing is significant.
If the other major car manufacturers weren’t already working a similar advertising system/platform, they’ve already scheduled multiple meetings to catch up.
This isn’t a problem that will be solved by the market and competition, only by regulation.
And I don’t consider tech savvy users learning how to hack and disable these features as a resolution, it’s just mitigation.