matrixagent

Thanks, sorry for the late response – busy week. Good point, wasn't even aware that the inherited variable view is only shown in projects but not subgroups. On a quick glance I couldn't find an existing feature proposal to add it at the subgroup level as well… but that might be because the search terms aren't terribly unique.

I'll show your demo to the team handling CI secrets, thanks again for sharing! :)

Do you have an example screenshot somewhere? I'm wondering what exactly this does that GitLab doesn't, because inherited variables are shown within GitLab UI directly – fairly barebones, though, so I'm curious to see your UI in action. (I work at GitLab, but not on this – just a big CI fan myself.)

I'm a Support Engineer at GitLab, and based on my own experience that statement is definitely correct. There's entire classes of problems you simply don't have to deal with at all for SaaS customers.

And no, you can’t read the minds of long dead people either.

And yet that is exactly what you are doing throughout multiple comments.

Thank you, that’s another good example, to which I wish I could relate less. ;)

Thanks, that's a great example. I've actually encountered this exact thing at my current employer as well.

All orgs should consider locking out all employees for at least one uninterrupted week a year. Very easy way to shake out all sorts of problems.

Could you give some examples?

I'm afraid that does not solve this particular problem, just happened again on the very first try. I still think this is intentional or at least happily accepted on part of Twitter, with the happy side effect to make it as shitty an experience as possible when you're not using their app.

Thanks, if that works that would be amazing. I'm most often getting it inside in-app browsers, e.g. when opening a Twitter link in Tweetbot, Apollo or similar apps. Not sure if they share the same central settings/service workers.

https://www.danielhill.com.au/removing-service-workers-from-...

Now I'm trying to figure out how to do it on Mobile Safari, where this bug always hits me.

That's exactly what I'm planning to explore as a workaround to remove the blank pages until ABBYY and/or Apple sort this out. :)

I think you might interpret the word more harshly than I intend it to be. Something that worked before Big Sur is not working in Big Sur. It's broken. That's all there is to it for me as an end user. Of course there is a difference in reasons for things breaking, and I'm not denying that Apple might have "improved" Preview.app when you judge it by how well it adheres to a PDF spec. But it still "broke" a very common and normal workflow by doing so, and I would at least expect them to acknowledge that. If they decide breaking this is worth it, that's absolutely fine with me. But I don't think they are even aware of it, and that is not something I'm willing accept from a company with the reach and resources of Apple.

This is at least the second time that Apple breaks Preview in this way. I outlined why this bug is something a lot of users could run into, and I even mention that I'm not necessarily holding it against them that it breaks, but specifically that they don't even care to mention it breaking. After the first time, which was a big deal at the time, they should have put safeguards in place so that they could notice it happening. If the fault is with ABBYY, then I'm okay with Apple breaking it for the sake of internally improving Preview, and blame for the breakage lies with ABBYY. But I expect Apple to tell me – because it happened before. That blame lies with Apple.

That is my reasoning, and I don't think that's too high a bar for one of the richest companies on the planet, priding themselves in the details and "it just works". You don't have to agree with that, obviously. Calling me an ass for that is extremely rude and uncalled for, though. I was under the impression that this tone was actually not acceptable here.

Yes.

Fair enough, though I'd still argue that a public write-up that might warn a few people and save them the trouble is well worth writing on its own. As this blog is just a hobby, my time for it is limited and it's not like a write-up like this doesn't already take up some time. I did provide plenty of resources in the links, to which I don't think sample PDFs from me would add much value. But point taken, I'll try to attach sample data where applicable in the future.

In theory that is probably true – in my actual scenario I can't run them through ABBYY again because of the limitations of the bundled version. It only accepts PDFs coming from the scanner software, so running these through ABBYY again would give me an error message. I'd have to buy the full version to be able to try out that workaround.

Could you explain why or how exactly I'm an ass?

If you're not going to do the work to figure out what the corruption is …

I'm sorry, but last time I checked neither Apple nor ABBYY pay my salary. I really don't understand these takes. If Apple or ABBYY want my PDFs, they should be able to find my email address rather easily. Your tl;dr version of the post is completely unfair. I publicly criticize Apple because they are breaking something that potentially affects a lot of people who are unlikely to even know about it, and they are doing it for at least the second time now. If you don't think that's worthy of criticism, I don't know what is.

I also love how so many people assume I didn't already talk to support and file radars. I guess you had better luck in the past than me, but I can assure you, these options aren't always as useful as you might think they are.

That's fair, and I honestly didn't enjoy posting the headline here, but as far as I know I have to use the original title? And the original title is from a personal blog where we talk about annoying things. We're not a professional tech blog, or a bug tracker, or… something other than our own little thing. I choose that headline not to be clickbait, but "sensationalist" is probably true because I'm personally really, really angry about this issue. I wanted to do my usual "scan all my documents for the month" routine 30 minutes before going to bed, and instead it turned into a two hour debugging session. And I can't even use my normal workflow now, possibly until March. I find it completely unacceptable that Apple would break Preview that way again. It's not even the first time. Just thinking about it now gets me going again. That's why the headline sounds like it sounds. I would have no problem at all if it was modified here, and as I said – your assessment is absolutely fair.

Well, technically you at least only have a chance of noticing the error after opening a PDF (again). I suppose that's because after saving the old, correct data is still in memory, but I don't know exactly when the corruption happens – would surprise me if it wasn't upon saving, though.

I personally don't use anything else, but when the problem first occured a few years ago, it was not limited to PDFs from ABBYY. (Which is not to say that it's purely Preview.app's fault. Maybe all of these PDFs were created in a bad way, would not surprise me at all. Could very well be that Preview.app is actually "improving" and fixing old bugs/cruft, breaking things that worked before but never should have in the first place. As the end user that doesn't really matter for me though, as I said in the post itself.)

I honestly don't care who is exactly at fault. I definitely blame Apple for destroying the PDF. There might be plenty of blame left for ABBYY for creating a bad PDF in the first place. That does not change how utterly unacceptable Preview.app's behavior here is. If you honestly think there is no valid criticism for Apple here, I don't know what to tell you. In any case, the whole thing is annoying technology – and seeing some of the comments here, people should more often try to step out of their own mind bubble and try to look at these things form their grandparents' or similar perspective. I personally am very aware of plenty of ways to work around this issue. But Apple used to be the company you could use if you either are not or don't want to be concerned about things like that.

And a quick edit: I really dislike people who discuss like you do – all of what I just wrote is already stated in the post itself. Another commenter even called you out for ignoring that part when quoting me. I should not have wasted five minutes spelling it out for you again, your mind won't be changed anyway.

Read it again. This bug could hit you without ever using ABBYY yourself. Apple broke Preview.

Interesting, I've always wondered about the very different approaches of Basecamp and GitLab when it comes to remote salaries. Basecamp pays the same, GitLab always (as far as I know) followed the same idea as Twitter and VMware are now doing. I think I prefer the same pay for the same work, regardless of where you are – but as long as cost of living is so ridiculously different that's probably not really feasible. I'd also like that to change, though.

Ahh, so as long as I only list single ports and not pairs, it is not exposed to the host, because the other number of a pair is the port to be exposed on the host. And therefor it is not exposed to the public network in this case. Makes sense, thanks for the explanation!

If I'm reading the docker-compose file correctly, this creates an open dns resolver that is accessible to the outside, as Docker by default bypasses the firewall, see https://github.com/chaifeng/ufw-docker. I'm not quite sure about that, though, so I'd be happy to be corrected and learn more about how your setup works exactly.

Works fine on a Dell and an Acer for me, never heard of that before as well.

Do you have a link to that chair? Would you recommend it?

And which is not something Spotify will change. Did you read the article? It goes into detail about that, the only thing that would probably change here is that the ads won't be read by podcasters anymore but inserted by Spotify ad-tech. They can't pay podcasters without getting a lot more money than they get from current subscriptions, they are still loosing money on their music subscription service. That's the entire point of their podcast pivot. Make more money. They have no money to hand out to podcasters. Podcasts won't be ad-free on Spotify, no matter if you're paying or not.

Completely agreed, your comment made it sound like you were suggesting only RSS instead of any vendor-specific links to me, but I misunderstood. :)