![](https://the.coolest.zone/media/b1/7a/b17afbf99761f1e8a0835ff12be8c7168050ac554cc1510383f7415fd7b9c0a8.png)
![](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/d3d059e3-fa3d-45af-ac93-ac894beba378.png)
Jesus fuck thank you, it’s so hard seeing a bunch of doomer shit in threads like this
I sometimes admin. But usually not.
Jesus fuck thank you, it’s so hard seeing a bunch of doomer shit in threads like this
Blind brand loyalty to something you don’t enjoy is a waste of your precious time on earth
He ALREADY testified: he was found dead AFTER.
Barnett’s body was found in a vehicle in a Holiday Inn parking lot in Charleston on Saturday, police said. One day earlier, he testified in a deposition about the string of problems he says he identified at Boeing’s plant where he once helped inspect the 787 Dreamliner aircraft before delivery to customers.
https://www.npr.org/2024/03/12/1238033573/boeing-whistleblower-john-barnett-dead
You’re thinking of BD-R: BD-RE can be rewritten/erased hundreds of times
Great answer, and to add to this:
There’s a world of difference between someone who’s single, not satisfied with it, and actively desiring/seeking a relationship (single and looking) and someone who actively self-identifies as inherently doomed to be single due to the actions/perceptions of others (incel).
People in the former category NEVER call themselves incels.
I totally agree, though I wrote this in the context of OPs post specifically saying (emphasis mine):
I have seen in many US shows where they portray guys who are living with parents as losers, or there are jokes or memes about it, I never get it.
Scrolled through the thread long enough and I still only see people blaming stigma and capitalism but… Those are just the end effects.
It’s plain toxic masculinity:
Yep, the other workaround that’s elsewhere in this thread is to set up an entry with a different authoritative DNS in the hosts file, allowing a single machine to resolve the old domain manually.
This could be part of a greater effort, basically asking other instances to help the users evacuate the instance and transfer their accounts, before running tootctl self-destruct
OP, this title is stupidly misleading and incorrect, you should change it immediately.
The Taliban seized the DOMAIN, aka the ownership of the queer.af
name that people could type into their browsers, and their system would resolve into an IP address.
As the Taliban control Af
ghanistan, (see where the domain comes from), this was inevitable and the instance owners were already planning to retire the instance as they didn’t want to give money to the Taliban to keep it up.
The INSTANCE, aka the physical server, was not in Afghanistan, and still has its IP address(es), and so has had absolutely nothing happen to it.
It can also be used to make methamphetamine.
Damn, Steamboat Willie going into public domain really has Disney tightening the purse strings /s
As a Bay area native, I’ve never encountered worse drivers than the entire state of Maryland.
An API token is more secure than a password by virtue of it not needing to be typed in by a human. Phishing, writing down passwords, and the fact that API tokens can have restricted scopes all make them more secure.
Expiration on its own doesn’t make it more secure, but it can if it’s in the context of loading the token onto a system that you might lose track of/not have access to in the future.
Individual API tokens can also be revoked without revoking all of them, unlike a password where changing it means you have to re-login everywhere.
And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Lmk if you have questions, though.
Right?? To let your website be susceptible to that kind of act by anyone means that you probably didn’t really care about security in the first place, so much as just getting the magic lock icon happy.
Right? Like fuck Google and all, but can you imagine how many absurdities would have to have happened in order for it to be blocked?
Others beat me to the punch on saying this is just worse WebAuthN, but there are some specific flaws that boil down to saying that this whole thing is, at best, totally inconsiderate of real attack vectors such as phishing
Online Login: On supported platforms, log in with your ‘Sign’ rather than your email address. The service checks for a corresponding email in their database that produces the same hash with the chosen algorithm/options. Services can eventually replace emails with ‘Signs’ for regular users.
Enhanced Privacy: Limits the need to share email addresses, reducing spam and data breach risks.
Huh? What does this even mean? How can you avoid sharing your email and replace it with a sign, if they need to check it against their database of… Emails?
Real-Life Usage: In physical stores, use your QR-art ‘Sign’ when asked if you have an account/booked at table.
Ah excellent. Someone can just look at a security camera or just snap a photo over your shoulder and steal your sign then. Because your proposal sure doesn’t note any way that these are 1-time use only. And if they were, this sounds like an awfully inconvenient way of receiving a temporary number (which sites usually only ever do as a cheap/bad 2FA method/password resets)
Email Verification: Receive a unique link via email, confirming your email’s validity.
Oh boy, better make sure to not get phished! Or that the link is 1 time use! Or that you aren’t being victimized by a MITM attack and getting it intercepted immediately!
Hey, I maintain a highly popular (if niche) FOSS library. Where the fuck is my big tech paycheck where they bribe me into integrating with their product?
/s Silly take IMO, relies on cherry-picking popular FOSS projects where you can see “the influence” of big tech, AND then No True Scotsman your way into saying that they’re not allowed to participate in the development/influence of FOSS because… checks notes they’re the ones funding the project/putting money in front of otherwise unpaid volunteers?
If you end up coming up with a better scheme for things that has the actual practical effect of compensating devs appropriately (yes, that means at current market rates or better) for their work, then please let us know so we can switch to doing that immediately. I will literally do anything you suggest if it would achieve that end.
No, it absolutely wasn’t, as can testify anyone who actually had to work with it: https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/the-death-of-adobes-flash-is-lingering-not-sudden/
There are lots of good reasons to get rid of Flash. Browser makers say it’s a top sore spot for security, performance and shorter battery life.
https://tedium.co/2021/01/01/adobe-flash-demise-history/
Usability means a few things in this context—simplicity, ease of use, convention, and accessibility. Flash was none of those things. It took the blank-canvas approach to creativity—which was great for the artists and illustrators that originally made up its target audience, but morphed into numerous other forms that it wasn’t necessarily designed for. It fell into overuse and quickly became abused by others.
The sad reality is that most of the people reading your comment and mine are naturally going to be privileged enough to have literacy education, internet access, and the spare time to browse the internet.
Too many leftists think locally and not globally; underprivileged individuals in other countries half a world away are easy for them to disqualify as an “out of context problem”, when we should all be in this together: global intersectionality.