![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://fry.gs/pictrs/image/c6832070-8625-4688-b9e5-5d519541e092.png)
Unironically, yes. Everything we had 20 years ago, but worse.
Unironically, yes. Everything we had 20 years ago, but worse.
I feel like this is the first time I’ve EVER heard of a fine being “all the profits you made from the fraud.” Is this for real? Why the hell is it Razer, of all companies, that’s getting a proper punishment?
“Yeah, Jessica, we’ve talked about this. You can’t just SAY that racist things should be avoided, we’re trying to APPEAL to racists, remember?”
So, wait, Mocrosoft is finally giving us a way to fully-disable automatic Windows Updates?
/s
MLB 66
A couple of video streaming services, Hulu, which includes Disney+, Discovery+ and Netflix. That totals up to like $50/mo or so.
Other than that, it’s aaaallllll independent creators, through Twitch or Patreon.
You mention Bally and baseball, mlb66 was my go-to last year.
Defederation is an administrative solution, specifically for when the user-facing tools like muting and blocking aren’t enough. It’s the solution against instance admins that aren’t capable or willing to moderate their users, or that are actively malicious.
So, what you’re saying is, their current setup is working for you, and their new proposal for lower-orbit satellites isn’t really necessary?
If you’re unsure about GUMBIES, you should take a look at this video.
Sees link
It’s retro-encabulators, isn’t it?
clicks
Ooooo, new programmer meme lore.
YT Kids avsolutely has ads.
I hate Huffman as much as the next guy, but the $193 million factoid is misleading clickbait nonsense. His actual salary is apparently $400k, the rest is “stock value” or whatever. Reddit is not giving 25% of its yearly revenue to the CEO.
There was another article I read that had a snippet from F5. As I read it, their concern was that they have two release tracks: the paid/subscription track, and the free track. They are actually the same code, but the free track is just 2 releases behind, so the idea is that if you want the “latest and greatest” stuff, you gotta pay. It’s a fairly common strategy in the industry.
So, the concern is that for security vulnerabilities that are not CVEs, info about the vulnerability (and how to exploit it) is out in the wild for two whole releases, before the patch reaches the free-tier users.
Seems like an actively good position on F5’s part, from this angle.
Me, I’m noticing the distinct lack of any information on cost or cost-effectiveness.
Stating outright that you don’t expect the obvious thing that always happens to happen… bro you’re already giving shareholders a reason to say you’re an incompetent manager and replace you with someone that will gut the company for stock growth.
or the equipment os designed horribly
I find this entirely believable. There’s a LOT of equipment out there designed for profit over user experience.
But you’re right, it’s not really worth speculating over.
I mean, yeah, they could do exactly that. “We cater to the needs of creative professionals and personal users that need a streamlined user experience” or some other execu-speak. Who are they gonna alienate, all those gamers that are already not buying macs for gaming?
Seems like the y’re taking issue not with the technology, but Rite-Aid’s implementation of it, particularly that they didn’t do any of the required dilligence to prove that the tech wouldn’t be harmful, or violate privacy, or would even be accurate.
An additionap note on what a certificate is, to supplement everyone here who’ve desceibe howbthat’s the missing piece:
A certificate’s first main purpose is being the vehicle vy which the public key is distributed, but additionally it contains information ABOUT the owner. Then the whole thing is digitally signed with the private key (and also a trusted CA’s private key), so that a receiver can validate the authenticity of the cert with the public key.
The “info” in the cert can theoretically be anything, but the most important one is the domain. Your browser knows that visiting google.com is secure because it checks the cert it gets from google.com to see if it states that it owns the google.com domain, and then we trust the root CAs around the world to make clients prove they own that domain, before issung a cert for it.