The fact that you think it's not possible means that you're not familiar with CVSS scores, which every CVE includes and which are widely used in regulated fields.
And if you think that always updating to the latest version keeps you safe then you've forgotten about the recent xz backdoor.
Some of the classic RTS games perhaps, like C&C or Starcraft? They tend to be story driven and the most stats you tend to care about are "do I have enough resources" and "do I have enough units?"
I used to be a teaching assistant at university, and never sorted by name. But based on my experience I don't think it's frustration that accounts for the disparity, it's that as you see more and more assignments you start getting a feel for common issues and are able to point them out more easily. I would always do two passes because of that to ensure that I normalized the weight of my marking.
Just because it has a CVE number doesn't mean it's exploitable. Of the 800 CVEs, which ones are in the KEV catalogue? What are the attack vectors? What mitigations are available?
Here's a third one: They have a Welcome Stamp visa program where you can work remotely from there for a year, and it's renewable. You can even bring your family. Under this program you only pay income tax on your country of origin.
To be fair though, the chance that every Lemmy instance goes down at the same time is so much lower than Reddit going down. Sure, my instance might be unavailable, but I'd be able to hop onto the next one and continue.
As a follow up: if the answer is "yes, it's still the same ship" then one can ask: if you take all the original parts and build a ship with them, is that the same ship as well?
I've seen it successfully happen due to licensing costs and cloud migration (MSSQL->Spanner), as well as for scalability reasons (vanilla postgres->cockroach). The first one was a significant change in features, the latter did sacrifice some native plugins. In the first case the company was using vendor specific features, and rewrote the backend to fit the new vendor.
There's vendor agnosticism, and then there's platform agnosticism. Writing your code so that it's not tied to one specific implementation of postgres is fine, and lets you use a compatible drop-in. Writing your code so you can swap MSSQL for Oracle or Aurora or whatever at will does not make sense. In every case of attempted platform agnosticism I've seen they ended up abandoning the project within a year or two with nothing to show for it.
You can blame Google for that. Their algorithm is built in a way that any page that doesn't follow a certain format just won't rank high, and that format doesn't fit "just the recipe" pages.
What this actually shows is how much previous governments fucked up and how desperate and angry the Argentine people were that this clown started to look like a good idea. To those with an outside perspective it was always obvious that this would only end badly, but to them it was an "any port in a storm" situation.
lemmyng @ lemmyng @lemmy.ca Posts 2Comments 508Joined 2 yr. ago
GM had at one point been working on an eCrate block for conversions, but they seem to have abandoned it.