←back to thread

2039 points Gadiguibou | 10 comments | | HN request time: 1.075s | source | bottom
1. brazzledazzle ◴[] No.36492363[source]
Probably want to check your policies if using a business-owned mac. Caffeinate probably violates your security policies if it’s a decent sized company.
replies(3): >>36492485 #>>36492983 #>>36499523 #
2. pantulis ◴[] No.36492485[source]
Why?
replies(1): >>36492657 #
3. salzig ◴[] No.36492657[source]
with sleep comes "unlock screen" ;)
replies(2): >>36493459 #>>36494440 #
4. computerfriend ◴[] No.36492983[source]
You can lock the screen while caffeinated though.
replies(1): >>36494189 #
5. pantulis ◴[] No.36493459{3}[source]
Ouch! Thanks!
6. brazzledazzle ◴[] No.36494189[source]
Automatic screensaver enable after a period of inactivity is considered a fail safe control.
replies(1): >>36494928 #
7. Groxx ◴[] No.36494440{3}[source]
Caffeinate with -u and then lock your screen. (Apple menu -> lock screen)

It'll stay connected/running/screen-on/etc but it's still locked.

8. wpm ◴[] No.36494928{3}[source]
`caffeinate` can set assertions, the same assertions that Zoom or PowerPoint or Keynote do to stop the screen going to sleep during a meeting or presentation, the same assertions that the browsers can set during streaming video, so you absolutely can bypass whatever your admins set using `caffeinate -dmisu` which sets every assertion available.
replies(1): >>36528531 #
9. Macha ◴[] No.36499523[source]
I thought that was its primary use case these days
10. brazzledazzle ◴[] No.36528531{4}[source]
It’s not about capabilities, it’s about policy. Willfully violating security policies is generally going to go over poorly.