Clipclap

Earn money by acquiring clap coin with can be earn through watching videos and playing games.Also earn daily rewards

Withdraw via paypal



https://s2.clipclaps.tv/i/7096725262

.

google apps script – indexOf return -1

soy principiante en google-app-scrip.
Estoy tratando de resolver un problema. Les comento, necesito poder encontrar la posición de un dato, dentro de un vector. Para esto realicé la siguiente funcion.


var EquiposStock = SpreadsheetApp.getActiveSpreadsheet().getSheetByName("EquiposStock");

var datosOriginales= EquiposStock.getRange(2, 1,EquiposStock.getLastRow(),1).getValues()(0);

//var filtro = '23?57';


var pos = datosOriginales(0).indexOf('23?57');


Logger.log('POSICION',pos);
Logger.log(datosOriginales);




}

Pero me está retornando -1 en…. Por favor, alguien podrá ayudarme a resolver este inconveniente.

Muchas Gracias!!

introducir la descripción de la imagen aquí

How to use google apps script to validate a cell?

/** @OnlyCurrentDoc */
function myFunction() {

  var app = SpreadsheetApp
  var activeSheet = app.getActiveSpreadsheet().getActiveSheet();


  for (var i = 1; i<10; i++) {

   var workingcell = activeSheet.getRange(i,1).getValue();
    if( workingcell == "TRUE" ) { 

       activeSheet.getRange(i,2).setValue("Incorrect Data");
       }

  else {activeSheet.getRange(i,2).setValue("DD Data");}    

}
}

Postfix SMTP sends to localhost, even when MX points to Google Apps aspmx.l.google.com

I have been looking for days for this solution. My CENTOS7 Postfix sever (with Virtualmin, Virtual users) is working fine with the mail services. All its domains. However, one of my domains which only use this server for hosting, POINTS to google for MAILING service (aspmx.l.google.com). People from out of my server can mail to that domain, and Google receives it without issues. So, my MX records are pointing fine.
But other users from INSIDE my server trying to send mails to this domain that points to google get a reply

The following recipient(s) cannot be reached:

‘test@domain-to-google.com’ on 6/2/2020 2:01 PM
Server error: ‘550 5.1.1 :
Recipient address rejected: User unknown in virtual alias table’

The only similar case I just found was on this thread here from 8 years ago:

Postfix SMTP sends to localhost, ignores MX records set to Google Apps

But the solution on that question is not my case.

I verified my postfix main.cf:

mydomain = maindomainserver.com
myhostname = server.maindomainserver.com
mydestination = localhost
myorigin = $mydomain

Which I tried already several combinations (per several forums suggestions, readings, postfix manuals, etc, including removing ALL of those 4 lines above, leaving them to be handled by POSTFIX defaults. Always same thing (the local delivery and SMTP out always working fine in any scenario)

And I also checked my etc/hosts file (as suggestion in the solution from that thread above):

127.0.0.1 localhost localhost.localdomain localhost4 localhost4.localdomain4
::1 localhost server localhost6 localhost6.localdomain6
xx.xx.xxxx.xxx server.maindomainserver.com

so my 127.0.0.1 is not pointing my localhost domain.

What else can be checked here in order to have that domain (pointed to GOOGLE) to finally receive messages from inside-server senders, and avoid POSTFIX to look for that address locally?

macos – What sorts of apps should I grant Keychain access to?

Some apps ask me for Keychain access when installing them, configuring them, and/or using them. As with anything related to computer access, permissions and security, giving the app access could be a great convenience to me or a security hole. Unfortunately, I don’t know enough about the process to give informed consent. I don’t want to grant an application more permission/access than it absolutely needs.

Assuming that I’m installing software that is not overtly suspicious, how can I evaluate whether or not I should grant an application’s request to access Keychain?

What are all these “Screen Mirroring” apps actually doing?

There are a plethora of “Screen Mirroring” apps available on the Google Play store, but after trying a few of them without success I am thinking they are not actually doing anything, because I have noticed that all of them do the same thing – show me an ad or two and then redirect me to the “Cast” option already on my phone!

Is the app itself actually doing anything? Why do we need one at all? I have found that several of them have this 4-step connection process where it claims to be Searching for devices, Identifying the device, Installing Drivers, Connecting (But then doesn’t connect and doesn’t seem to have found my device at all!). The progress indicator moves so smoothly that I find it hard to believe it’s real. Is that just for show? I wonder because I have come across it on several different apps.

So the question is, what are the apps doing, and why could we not just go into the Settings / Cast on the phone already?

How to display Logged in User details from a list in SharePoint with Power Apps

I am creating a simple Power apps application, I need help on how to display a list content of logged in User.
example, If the logged in User name match the List field titled Name then display contents of that row.

Having a whitelist of install-able apps on a custom Android ROM

I would like to create a custom Android ROM that has very specific settings. I want to give this custom ROM a list of apps, and the only apps that can be installed on that Android devices should be from that custom list.
What part of the android file/filesystem would need to be altered to accomplish this?

research – Should there be more square and round shaped buttons than there are at the moment in the main part of webpages and apps?

References regarding optimal and minimum contact area or touch target size on mobile devices (also similar question previously on UXSE here) suggest that the contact area should fit the rough size and contact point on a thumb.

Weighing up the pros and cons for a square or round shaped button or call-to-action, it doesn’t seem like there is enough square or round shaped buttons because of the amount of body text and length of characters used on labels and the typical way layouts are structured on webpages that focus a lot more on the width than height.

However, when we look at the proliferation of cards and tiles being used on many mobile apps and website home pages, it seems to suggest that they are more useful in certain types of contexts.

Also, in game interface designs where there is less emphasis on reading text (e.g. in dialogues) and more focus on interactions, buttons don’t tend to be rectangular shaped but have shapes that seem to be more fit for the purpose of optimizing the touch area.

With the more common use of voice-as-an-interface and also with more traffic now coming directly from mobile devices, is there any particular reason that there are not more square or round-shaped buttons on user interfaces? Is this a trend that we would expect to see more on the body of a webpage rather than just on the areas of the screen that are more condensed (e.g. menu headers and toolbars)?

web app – One app with more features vs. separate apps focused on one thing

The term you’re looking for is debundling. Debundling is definitely not just a UX decision. It’s a collective decision between business technology and design. There are many reasons why not to debundle a software and same amount of reasons why the product should have been debundled immediately.

First major debundling seen from Foursquare. They’ve released a fun app where you can tag your location, leave reviews etc etc. But then they’ve received a huge interest and then they’ve started to collect massive amount of data which made them a good rival against yelp. But the thing is, foursquare released as an startup and probably didn’t had the structural code hierarchy of an enterprise company (just assuming here) Instead just piling the data they were looking forward to monitise the data so as a business decision they’ve decided shift the company model into a data company instead of just an entertainment company. But also they didn’t want to ditch their user base. Doing the two different complete business under one brand would be just a chaotic mess as seen in FB atm. So -as a very short- they’ve come up with a another app called Swarm for the users and kept the entertaining part in there and reshaped Foursquare into a way more enterprise company. Well I’m not saying that it’s been executed pretty well but they’re still a strong name in their field and seems like everything been worked out just fine for them.

Another example would be Google. They have dozens of apps which they use the same password but doing completely different things. It would be HELL if I only had a ‘Google’ app where I can check my mails, download files from drive, watch videos on youtube, start a video conference, etc.

I don’t know the technical details but they do have a shared API that talks between google apps within iPhone. So logging in within a fresh installed Google app on my iPhone is not a problem. But their decision to debundling drive into different apps I find a bit annoying. I could literally do the same edits within drive and if I happen to have docs or sheets installed by mistake, I end up jumping between apps and can’t understand what’s been going on. If I’m using drive on iOS, I’m always lost (that’s why I don’t prefer using it on mobile devices but from desktop)

Last example would be Facebook. Basically they HAD TO debundle their application because they were literally living the hellish Google app example I’ve mentioned a paragraph before. I remember at some point their application was so bloated that it was over 700mbs. Most of the iOS games takes that much of a space if they have 3D graphics and high res textures. Those are the ones takes up space. Facebook doesn’t have that. Just lines of codes. So at some point it became harder to release a stable app so they had so debundle it into several different apps. (they all failed so they’ve came to an understanding that they didn’t needed to have 4 different snapchat clones and another few clones of their own messenger apps)

So my point is, line could be several different reasons. Could be business related, technology related. Oh yeah, sometimes it can be even UX related too. But mostly business and technology.