redjard

Reaching for those
whom to the ends
will be shown

Try Summit, at this point it’s a pretty effective boost killer and also foss.
It’s developed at a high pace (which is why it reached boost killer status quite recently imo) so if you miss any feature you can request it and probably see it added in a week or two.

You have to dm your account password to @Chronographs@lemmy.zip now.
Sorry, I don’t make the rules.

lmao

Remote work/administration too. I work on servers one of which is behind the chinese firewall, via ssh. ssh can carry socks natively, I could build a crude throttled but working vpn in seconds.

China is also slowing transfers in general, I guess to push domestic providers and servers. Even with that if they don’t want to sever all economic and scientific connections it will remain possible, though cumbersome to most.

Chopsticks clearly do fork things. I see them as a more specialized fork since they blunt-cut worse than a fork, and you have even higher viscosity requirements for scooping stuff, but for manipulation they beat forks.

A single chopstick is however useless, so clearly they each are half a fork.

This is so turbing.

In the basic case you go to settings and change permissions.

In the more typical case for os modifications, you go to that tab, open advanced properties, change the owner account by typing in “everyone” or your account name by hand, saving, closing reopening the advanced security settings, probably disable inheritance then create a new permission entry.

In the most extreme case, where you change files belonging to something critical like windows defender or edge, you can’t.
The only way I am aware of is booting into an older windows install iso, or a live linux iso, then performing the modifications there.

Disclaimer: I have not done this on windows 11 yet, but I can’t imagine the process got simplified.

Windows has a lot of systems that allow some more complicated modifications. Those are often unnecessarily obfuscated, the registry for example doesn’t have to be a weird custom database, it could have been part of the filesystem or at least a more standard database format. Windows will sometimes bite you with weird sketchy systems breaking expectations, and this tends to become inevitable when you try to change stuff Microsoft has decided to remove consumer choice on.
If Edge and the account push were as easy to avoid as learning how to take basic file ownership, we might not be where we are now (i.e. on Linux).

I’m not certain, can’t find any reliable info on this.
Shops don’t seem to specify the reflective material. In addition, aluminium is commonly used to describe the frame, and silver as a color for the frame or other parts, making it hard to get any info on the sales side.

On the production-tech side, I see some pages talk only about silver, others mention both silver and aluminium. Silver commonly has a description of the chemical process at times (silver nitrate silvering), haven’t seen one for aluminium yet.

Price wise, metal should be fully opaque around 10nm. Assuming a generous 100nm thickness, that makes 0.1€/m² worth of silver. I doubt material cost is a factor.

Performance wise, silver seems better than aluminium in its reflectance. Honestly I don’t get why anyone would be making aluminium mirrors.

Does anyone have more info on this?

Mirrors now are chemically deposited silver to my knowledge.
Deposited on the back of the glass, then a protective layer applied on top. The amount of silver in that assembly is very low, and none is exposed, but the reflective component is the silver.

Post should be marked nsfw

I’m not your bro, pal.

Was about to say this.

I saw a small-time project using hashed phone numbers and emails a while ago, where assume stupidity instead of malice was a viable explanation.

In this case however, Plex is large enough and has to care about securiry enough that they either
did this on purpose to make it sound better, as a marketing move,
did not show this to their security experts,
or chose to ignore concerns by those experts and likely others (turning it into the first option basically)

There is no option where someone did not either knowingly do or provoke this.

It’s not failing in the technical sense, in the same way tech-support-scams aren’t a failure of online-banking.

You can consider the unfixable nature of such scams an inherent flaw of the system, I suppose it is. An inevitable tradeoff for the automated nature such a system has, where a central authority would have the ability to roll things back.

On the other hand, plenty of online financial scams are not able to be rolled back, often enough banks simply pay you out of an insurance pool. The same could be implemented for blockchains I suppose. Or on top as a regular insurance specialized for “blockchain trading” or whatever. You could also enforce transaction locks, similar to a lot of bank transactions, though that would slow purchases in the same way.

About banks not running off with stuff, I mean rarely they are but usually not yes. There is a reason the core audience of blockchain technologies are paranoid people.

The legitimate usecases for fungible blockchain (crypto currencies) is countries (and corporations) regulting and limiting anonymity and even ability of transactions. That has applications from drug purchases (meth) to drug purchases (hormone therapy under anti-lgbt regimes).

The usecase of blockchain contracts for example is for simple digital trade, currently I can only think of crypto currency exchange, since this fundamentally only makes sense for goods that are themselves on a blockchain.

The legitimate usecase of non-fungible blockchain (nft) is

You can’t be 100% sure about organizations following these practices, to the degree that blockchains allow. Organizations aren’t fully transparent, and people are fallible.
I still prefer https over all the secrecy we managed to get in letters before the digital era, even if our audit systems to ensure secrecy of communications then were impressive.

Even with a perfect audit trails and merge requirements, convincing a small group of people part of the same organization is easier than convincing a larger cryptographically-herded pool of who-knows who.

You can argue about how likely that is to ever be relevant for practical applications, but it is a system that is perfect in ways its “predecessors” aren’t.

For classical databases there is always someone with root access, who could modify whatever they want.
In practice, for important stuff, there is a good chance enough people were observing to make a case based on witnesses, but it isn’t exactly ideal.
You don’t often get banks running with your money or some storage facility selling your stuff illegally, but it could happen. And that is enough for some (paranoid) people. Maybe some day there might even be applications that would not otherwise be feasible due to fear of scams.
There is a usecase for crypto currencies, so why not the highly related NFTs where the only difference is that the stuff you own is a unique thing (like a title) instead of a bunch of non-unique things (like currency).

Yeah most people would think 4 is more than 3! while 3! is actually 50% more than 4.

This website is maintained by Uros Gazvoda, founder of Futuristica, to help spread uBlock Origin - free, open-source ad blocker.

Not fake, just unaffiliated. The presented links and info seem correct to me.
ubo is also warning about a different fake page on their repo but not this one.

1 Liter Wasser = 1 Kilogramm
1000 Liter = 1 Kubikmeter

At the very least the system should initiate an emergency break when it disengages like that and there is no conflicting human input.