kattfisk @ kattfisk @lemmy.dbzer0.com

Posts

0

Comments

152

Joined

2 yr. ago

There're a lot of privacy enthusiasts who seem to view privacy as a binary. So because Mozilla isn't perfect, it's as bad as can be.

They also commonly have little understanding of the underlying technology, law, business, etc., which I guess is why they can't do any threat modeling. They're just really scared of a nebulous threat they do not understand. Which I can sympathize with.

But privacy then becomes more about "staying pure" in some abstract sense, rather than about avoiding concrete threats.

(As a tip to those who want to do better, any real security starts with threat modeling. There is no such thing as perfect security, it's always a tradeoff. So you must do threat modeling to make sure you're putting your resources where they will make a difference.)

It's not about identity as much as it's a very poor way to try to convince someone.

Don't base your line of argument on a statement you know the other person will likely disagree with.

For example "You should play Pathfinder because DnD sucks", holds no weight to people who don't think that DnD sucks. In fact if they happen to like DnD, it undermines your argument, because if you disagree about DnD, aren't you also likely to disagree about Pathfinder?

If they play a system, they probably like that system and find its shortcomings acceptable. You can't convince someone that a system isn't enjoyable when they have first-hand evidence to the contrary.

Asking people to stop being comfortable doing something they like, so that they can be uncomfortable doing something you like, isn't a good value proposition.

If you lead with "Thing you like is actually bad", their immediate response will be to disagree with you and start defending the thing they like. And if you want someone to listen to your arguments, rather than just try to poke holes in them, you must avoid putting them on the defensive.

To get through to people, find common ground and build off that. "If you like FEATURE in GAME, you'll probably love SIMILAR FEATURE in OTHER GAME because..." is something that's actually going to get someone interested, rather than start a pointless argument :)

Well there are no crits on checks in 5e, so a nat 20 +0 is no different from a nat 6 +14. And someone with a +14 can't fail a check with a DC of 15 or lower.

Having Degrees of Success built into the system in PF2 is really neat though. And seems like something DnD could easily incorporate if Wizards had any vision.

Depending on where the burn is you can just put the burnt part in a container with cool water instead. It's much more practical to walk around with your hand in a cup than to be standing next to the faucet.

"shouldn't be too hard"?!

A regular lich is CR 21.

For comparison, an adult red dragon is CR 17 and the most powerful demon, the balor, is CR 19.

There are almost no creatures more powerful than liches. Even ones that are not Vecna.

Repeating what they heard is very different from automatically processing the chat to harvest personal information about the participants.

Just because some data is publicly available doesn't mean all processing of that data is legal and moral.

You're both getting side-tracked by this discussion of recording. The recording is likely legal in most places.

It's the processing of that unstructured data to extract and store personal information that is problematic. At that point you go from simply recording a conversation of which you are a part, to processing and storing people's personal data without their knowledge, consent, or expectation.

There are LED bars for mounting in your rear windows to display text to those behind you

Gay.

It's the Gay Intersex Marxist Program. Obviously.

This is an outrage!

Coq was such an excellent name. Short, memorable, unique, related to its origins and logo, as well as funny.

Aluminium smelting is so energy intensive that Iceland, a country with a population of less than 400 000, is the world's 12th largest producer of it, even though the raw materials aren't mined there. Iceland just has cheap geothermal and hydroelectric power.

In the real world there is no entirely reasonable code base. There's always going to be some aspects of it that are kind of shit, because you intended to do X but then had to change to doing Y, and you have not had time or sufficient reason to properly rewrite everything to reflect that.

We tend to underestimate how long things will take, precisely because when we imagine someone doing them we think of the ideal case, where everything is reasonable and goes well. Which is pretty much guaranteed to not be the case whenever you do anything complex.

I really recommend the whole series. It explains the origins of cop shows and their use as copaganda, as well as analyzing everything from Marvel movies to Paw Patrol in their depiction of law enforcement.

Then you just pay the president for a pardon. No worries.

It's petty funny to see them rediscover why we have all these financial regulations

Being "fungible" means that something is functionally equivalent with something else.

For example even though every dollar bill is unique (they have unique serial numbers), they are all fungible. If you deposit $100 in the bank, then withdraw $100 later, you are not getting the same bills, maybe not even the same denominations, but you don't care because it doesn't matter.

In the digital world copies are cheap and perfect. There is literally no way to tell a copy of an image from "the original". So in the digital world all copies of something are fungible, and originals don't meaningfully exist.

NFTs try to introduce artificial scarcity to the digital space by creating a distinction between "the original" of something and the copies, by introducing a sort of chain of custody tracking system.

What if we took the art market, where prices can be whatever, so it's really easy to launder money. Then we let people easily set up multiple accounts for wash trading. And we supported currencies held in stupidly large amounts by people who can't legally use them for anything useful.