Observer1199 @ Observer1199 @lemmy.ml

Posts

0

Comments

40

Joined

2 yr. ago

Is anyone surprised? I don't understand why these law firms don't require payment up front for "defendants" like this. I wouldn't represent them for all the money in the world but if I was going to I wouldn't do it on good faith that they'll pay me when the bill becomes due. The minute the owe me a cent, all work stops until payment is received.

Rule 41 of the internet - there's always a relevant XKCD comic.

I'm not sure that the maths in it is correct - I know there's some criticism of that in particular example but I think it holds up as long as you make it long enough and don't just use common short words or common phrases. Its also bad if there's a pattern to your passphrases e.g. only using colours, or sports team mascots, or all words of the same length, etc

And where possible use MFA (unless it's SMS based, then I wouldn't bother - I suspect when businesses offer that they just want to collect your phone number and don't care about security).

Just a slight correction - the old recommendation of using random chars, numbers, and symbols is no longer best practice as it causes more issues than it solves. New best practice is use long passphrase with minimum 16 characters but I'd recommend minimum 24 for future proofing. That sounds like a lot but "mary-had-a-little-lamb" is 22 chars and not hard to remember or type. Obviously don't use exactly that password (since it's mine & passwords should be unique 😉)

Let's have everyone suffer as a result, and embolden more dickheads to follow his lead, lol that'd be funny and worth it /s

I hope that you're trolling right now and you don't think this is in anyway not a horrible idea. If not, get help.

I wonder if they can use passport photos for catching all the employers who commit wage theft, or catch the companies destroying the climate, or the companies not paying taxes, or the companies who flout regulations because they're so rich that the fines are a business cost, or corrupt politicians..

SSO allows users to use a single set of credentials to access multiple systems within a single organization (a single domain)

Instead having a seperate login for a website or an app you (or whoever) set up an SSO connection between the service provider's SSO platform and your SSO platform aka IdP. When trying to log into that website or app it redirects you to authenticate with your SSO platform. This way you sign in with your IdP (e.g. Azure, Ping, Okta, etc) credentials instead of having a seperate set of credentials for each site. If you've already logged into your IdP recently the site your logging into can detect that and you won't need to enter your password.

I believe the above example would be federated SSO because it's between your organisation and one or more other organisations or vendors.

Email is the most common but it can be lots of things (depending on what SSO platforms being used and how they are configured).

It's still possible to prevent you wiping the phone with the sim in. Admittedly that would work most of the time but all that's needed to change that is a someone watching the right YouTube videos and spreading the word.

If your phone is encrypted and has the correct security settings then your data isn't vulnerable. Unless it's a government agency or something like an APT. If that's the case there's little you can do besides not keeping any valuable data on it.

It's unlikely they care about your data though. Not unless you're wealthy enough to be bribed. The main concern for them is getting caught by tracking, depending on how much law enforcement cares.

What makes you think I'm angry?

Big Dilbert fan?

https://books.google.ie/books/about/The_Trouble_with_Dilbert.html?id=VU8VAQAAMAAJ&source=kp_book_description&redir_esc=y

https://apnews.com/article/kansas-city-business-d1d88fe02461930d9c2ad70e1f55b136

Ack that you just don't know.

In answer to your question, yes. Other NATO countries will go to war if any NATO country is attacked.

Think about it... are you willing to stand by and embolden a country by doing nothing when they nuke another? Any country that would be willing to nuke another over being called out for involvement in assassination is one that needs to be neutralized immediately to remove that nuclear threat.

By your very logic, if they are willing to nuke over nothing, they'll also do it to countries that sanction them. Just because you wouldn't help your friends in a fight or if they got attacked doesn't mean everyone is the same as you and just watch while it happens doing nothing. Think about it..

You keep asking people for proof but yet you provide none for your claims.

You're focusing (obsessing) about the wrong thing - you made up your mind as to what you think the solution is before you even asked the question and your rejecting the right answers because they don't confirm to the answer you want to hear.

If someone steals your phone, it's gone. "Locking" the sim card slot will not prevent this. Make your peace with that.

Sim card in or out, phones can be turned off. If the problem is as ubiquitous in your country as you suggest, law enforcement doesn't even care that if they didn't turn off the phone it does not matter. If law enforcement does care, they'll start using other techniques (Faraday bags) as soon as people start getting jail time. Despite your assertion otherwise, not all criminals are dumb and the ones that are, are still smart enough to copy the ones that aren't.

You won't be able to track them, you won't get justice, the thief's will make money, the world will continue to rotate just the same. Try addressing the problem elsewhere.

Hard disagree. Most people think that volume has a correlation with signal quality and shout during phone calls. Some people do it all the time (shouting instead of talking) regardless of being in the phone or in person.. If you haven't noticed this then other people are probably noticing it about you if you think most people use acceptable voice loudness on a call..

The beginning of the end for quality and integrity for Studio Ghibli. Can't really blame Miyazaki but this won't be good for fans.

I’ve taken responsibility for my actions

I must have missed the part where she took responsibility - anybody able to point it out?

It's very frustrating that it seems to be a standard response when someone is caught doing something wrong that they are taking responsibility for their actions but what it really means is that you're not supposed to talk about it or hold it against them or even hold them accountable since they already said they are "taking responsibility" for what they did. There is rarely, if ever, even an apology. Sounds like the opposite of taking responsibility to me....

I don't understand why it was a massive problem - I checked when it was ongoing and it was possible to purchase the domain so it seemed to me it was all overblown since buying it would have resolved everything.

No. Definitely not worth it. Completed predictable and so formulaic it's ridiculous.

I wouldn't even contact this company - I don't trust any company that does business by putting flyers through letterboxes claiming massive discounts over competitors or going door to door (esp when putting time pressure on people to sign up). If it sounds to good to be true, it is.

A telegraph article trying to whip people into a frenzy about foreign people being close by (and possibly having to gasp interact with one) isn't what I'd refer to as a reliable or credible source.

“I would feel cooped up and I would be walking down to Finchingfield with my mates,” said one local resident who is campaigning against the plans.

That's the same as saying only those with lots of money should be able to speak about how to manage wealth because poor people don't have experience doing so.

Can you provide context and a source for that claim? Seems very sensational and hyperbolic

Edited to add: it was sensational and hyperbolic. They were referring to asylum centres to reduce the cost of housing asylum seekers. There are issues here but they are certainly not concentration camps - calling them such is at minimum very disrespectful to those who have suffered and died in actual concentration camps.

The dating site has a section "as recommended by" and a quote from Jimmy Kimmel appearing to (mildly) endorse the site. I watched the monologue from Jimmy Kimmel the quote was lifted from - he's absolutely not endorsing the site, he was reading a blurb about what they said about themselves and the proceeds to make fun of the site culminating in him "punching" a (fake) spokesperson from the company on behalf of the 99% for being a douche.