These articles always get me thinking about filesharing doomsday. That theoretical point in time when our governments go full China and enact their own national firewalls/other scheme of effective P2P connection surveillance; when you need to know for certain that you've downloaded enough (and that your storage game is good enough) to last decades of leisure time, perhaps even a lifetime's worth.
but if you have a problem with the wages, just tip more.
enabler | noun
en·abler i-ˈnā-b(ə-)lər
: one that enables another to achieve an end
especially : one who enables another to persist in self-destructive behavior (such as substance abuse) by providing excuses or by making it possible to avoid the consequences of such behavior
The public internet is for P2P exchange as well, no matter how much gov/corp tries to stymie it. I2P has its merits, but it would be sad to see it take off purely because people ceded the former territory for an obscure network layer.
The safest way to log into an account in a non-trusted device
Wouldn't the better policy be to practice device compartmentalization? I have the 'pleasure' of interacting with a non-trusted device about 40 hours a week, and I can tell you the number of personal logins I access from that compartment is none
People (even the technically incllined) place way too much value on cross-platform sync.
The easiest tool is MakeMKV. But you'll often encounter opportunities for efficiency (eg stereo DTSHD to FLAC) as well as requirements to convert* for hardware compatibility. That's where ffmpeg and MKVToolNix are good secondary tools for customizing the remux contents.
*Not transcoding. Rather, lossless formet 1 -> lossless format 2.
Or put another way, it's enabling advertisers to better camouflage themselves as humans. (Because we just cannot have people communicating directly to each other on the web...)
Suppression of the suspect's voice really is misinformation on the part of states and corporations, albeit for different reasons.
Relevant laws and policies are employed in order to deliberately withhold public information about motive. They don't want people placing these incidents this within a broader context. There couldn't possibly be a belief set behind the behaviour; the perp didn't have any ideas about how the world works, or who and what caused their circumstances. Oh no.
Why did the shooter go out and shoot people is a completely legitimate question. More than that, it will never be an illegitimate question, no matter how much autistic screeching authorities do. Learning is never wrong, and that includes the publishing and reading of a criminal suspect's thoughts.
These articles always get me thinking about filesharing doomsday. That theoretical point in time when our governments go full China and enact their own national firewalls/other scheme of effective P2P connection surveillance; when you need to know for certain that you've downloaded enough (and that your storage game is good enough) to last decades of leisure time, perhaps even a lifetime's worth.