I thought that there were specific "critical" operations that would require them (Delta, Boeing, or both) to record an entry in Boeing's Collaborative Manufacturing Execution Systems (CMES) database. But I'm discovering this field, so I don't know if they make a difference in this context between before and after delivery, and if the normal plane maintenance is covered by the same processes or not, and that's why I'm asking, and not stating.
However, if one doesn't know more than me, stating isn't more correct.
In the long term? The homeless. Who will likely not stay homeless for long.
I dunno about you, but I met quite a few homeless people, and they are all the resourceful kind. They organize, they don't hesitate to join forces, and they are damn resilient.
I was homeless for a few weeks in the summer about a decade ago, I slept in a park, during the day, and it was totally fine in the end, but if such law would have made me "legal to hunt", I would have likely hunted back. Or at least died trying.
Being homeless doesn't necessarily mean having no resource. For example, while I was in a crappy situation, and lost my rental overnight, I had savings. I had enough to buy a weapon and some ammo anyway, and in such situation, with nothing left to lose, I would have likely bitten the (metaphorical) bullet and found myself a new home. The confrontational way.
I'm guessing that this initiative will drive most homeless people into organized crime, and they will then have the capacity to eliminate entire small, remote, rural communities (of which there are plenty in Kentucky), including the tiny police forces, and establish a fortified settlement.
Pushing people around only works for as long as they are better off accepting it than fighting it. Push too much and you will have gangs and cartels on your hands.
Those people want the far west experience, and they should be weary of what they wish for. They might very well get it.
Edit: maybe I'm daydreaming. I dunno. This isn't a hill I'm willing to die on, I just wish for what I wrote to be true. Time will tell.
Genre. "Les phrases dans l'image sont correctes.". Ou pas...
Sérieux, y'a moyen d'éviter de sortir des conneries grosses comme la lune avec l'aplomb de Chatte J'ai Pété, des fois? Ça nous changera, tiens. 😮💨
Edit: yeah, the correct phrasing would indeed be "Ça, c'est un tuyau" ("Pipe", in French, exclusively means "Smoking pipe", and as a slang, "Face", or "blowjob"). In the spirit of the joke, "Ça, c'est une pipe" would be acceptable, but only understandable by people who know the English term. However, "C'est une pipe" is absolutely wrong contextually: the lack of the contradiction implied by "ça" creates a semantic disconnect and the two images seem completely unrelated. Not only does it break the humorous device, but it also is absurd enough to be mildly irritating. So, no, the "phrases pictured" are not correct.
I suspect one of the ways that Google detects the invidious instances is with the instance's behavior: if a lot of different clients use a given instance, it makes it stand out.
Therefore using your own instance is a good way to get around that problem. I think I'll try that as well.
For an attacker with enough means, the private keys can always be exfiltrated, and content can be intercepted, but usually there are much simpler solutions for snooping on encrypted content: the devil is in the (implementation) details (this link is an illustration, and by no means an exhaustive list).
Cryptography is always simpler to go around than to break. So never be satisfied with a cryptography only (or protocol only) audit. There are near infinite of ways to neutralize encryption with a single line of code in a client.
The architecture is also essential. Client-Server encryption has entirely different use cases than Client-Client encryption (EE2E).
And finally, Schneier's law:
Any person can invent a security system so clever that she or he can't think of how to break it.
Yeah, but at least for now, we can still buy laptops with unsoldered RAM and storage.🤞
Besides, Apple is more of a cult than a tech company, so I am not convinced their customers should be taken as an example of a natural customer's behavior.
And I agree that most users don't care, although, this is mostly true in corporate environments, where computers have an expected lifespan of 3 years tops. In that case having the RAM soldered or not does not change anything, as the machine will get spec'ed according to what the company needs, and will get replaced before it ever reaches obsolescence.
For the end users, many still consider keeping a machine 5+ years, and if you check the average "long lasting" (~2k USD) machine from 5 years ago, it is an 8th gen i5 (4 cores, 8 threads) with 8GB of DDR4 and 256GB, or at best 512GB SSDs. Not that those are terrible specs by today's standard, but the people who spent 2k on a machine back then will probably want to have at least 16G of RAM now. And 1TB SSDs. And if at all possible, more than 8 threads. Heck, I just got a workstation for 550 bucks that has a ryzen 7 with 16 threads...
And that's where companies like framework come in. I advocate for them as much as possible, along with companies like system76 and purism. If we keep voting with our wallets for such companies, even if the CPUs becomes a SoC entirely, we will still get to have upgradability paths thanks the modularity of their laptops.
Edit: as expected, religious people got offended about me calling out their religion, thus proving my point. 🥲
Edit 2: don't get me wrong, I'm not denying that Apple has a good tech stack (as a BSD lover, that would be silly), and that the Lemmy audience is likely aware of that too. But it is also abundantly clear that the overwhelming majority of the Apple customers have absolutely zero idea what makes their "must have" tech stand out, and are merely in for the cult part. If Apple would stop making sense technologically, it wouldn't make the slightest difference to them.
Also, lots of users aren't gonna want the main system memory on the CPU die. Aside from the fact that it creates a clear path for vendors to artificially inflate prices through pretended scarcity via product segmentation and bundles, it also prevents the end users from upgrading the machines.
I'm pretty sure this even goes against the stated goals of the EU in terms of reduction of e-waste.
I have no doubt that a handful of vendors cooperating could restrict their offer and force the hand of end users, but I don't think this would be here to stay. Unless it provides such a drastic performance boost (like 2x or more) that it could be enough of an incentive to convince the masses.
That's a joke, because that's the way people make mistakes with apostrophes all the time.
The correct spelling is indeed "catastrophes", but a lot of people would spell it "catastrophe's" (which technically means "the [...] of catastrophe").
The point of the exchange in that context is to have a separate ledger. That is, to hide parts of the information, so that it is then impossible to relate information otherwise public.
You cannot do that with a paper wallet. A wallet (cryptographic material) and a ledger (a collection of transfers - the blockchain being an example of one) are totally unrelated.
I thought that there were specific "critical" operations that would require them (Delta, Boeing, or both) to record an entry in Boeing's Collaborative Manufacturing Execution Systems (CMES) database. But I'm discovering this field, so I don't know if they make a difference in this context between before and after delivery, and if the normal plane maintenance is covered by the same processes or not, and that's why I'm asking, and not stating.
However, if one doesn't know more than me, stating isn't more correct.