Remember during the 2016 election when Dems wrote a public letter to Google (while anti-trust was on the table) strongly advising them to remove what they considered 'misinformation' (e.g. Wikileaks)? Ye.. totally not in favour of censorship though as it was only an innocent 'suggestion'..
Indeed, but it's odd that creditcard companies are so hard on merchants. Surely they could just offer some program where they hold payments in escrow until the transaction is final and just subtract chargebacks from the escrow account as necessary.
Yep, platforms are getting silly. On Reddit the other day I got the usual popup about accepting cookies, but once clicked, instead of just setting the cookie it showed a popup saying that I need to switch to the new theme to accept cookies. As in, I'm forced to use their new theme just to click a button and then switch back to using the old theme (like any sane person).
In the same way popups saying "by continuing to view this site you consent to cookies" do? The user is informed and the cookie is(/should be) only set once they click a link / button / scroll past the initial view, which means they have taken an 'informed' action regarding cookies.
Well, a page being locked for editing is usually a sign that one side has decided the narrative and no further input distracting from it will be tolerated. And a clear indication to take the article with a mountain of salt.
In the past for a game-modding project we sort of opensourced reports. Users (meeting certain criteria) could visit a page and view 5 seconds of video and statistics of an alleged/detected cheater. Then select positive/negative/inconclusive. If (IIRC 5 users) had voted and the majority said positive/negative then a ban/unban would be issued. Because it was random reports and the usernames were hidden, there were no obvious bias.
Holding the money hostage for half a year on a 20 year old account? Not surprising. Paypal and their other entities like Ebay are pretty shit when it comes to nuance and their impact on others.
Had a 15 year old Paypal business account (parent started it and I took it over ~7 years ago) and last year they shut it down because I, as the new owner, was not 18 when the account was created. Nothing from the support but "computer said you bad, nothing we can do".
In Ebays case I sold an item, got the regular email from Ebay (DMARK/SPF/IP verified) that they had received payment and was holding it until the item had been delivered. Then a week later I got another email from them saying they had blocked the buyer for abuse (i.e. a fraudulent transaction to them) and that I shouldn't ship the item they told me to ship a week ago. After 2 months of trying to get through to the support they just claimed that someone spoofed their DMARK, SPF, and servers IP. After explaining how impossible that would be their 'proof' that it was 'spoofed' was that there should be a copy of the message in the Ebay inbox where, after the reply, all messages about the auction ever existing were suddenly gone.
Ye, I'm with you. To give the benefit of doubt to the author, maybe they were thinking of "turning to software innovation" as in optimizing / longer dev cycles that can result in less resource wastage. i.e. rather than needing the latest chip to run Electron based applications everywhere they'd spend a bit more time developing software that can run well on older chips.
Worth noting that the whole "can it be trusted" mainly revolves around political or otherwise controversial topics. Where entire pages can switch from "freedom fighter helping the world" to "literally Hitler" overnight with news articles/interviews being blacklisted for not being reliable while sourcing random blog-posts. For a good example, check the edit history of the Gamergate page, well known editors even got banned for wanting accuracy rather than pushing narratives.
People choose the easiest tool available to them. A common method in Europe is a belt to the doorhandle which is more painful and slower than a bullet. Removing tools does not prevent the outcome, just increases the suffering.
load save
----------------------------------------------
// image: 1165 x 859 (1943 KB) 24bpp
libpng: 19.2 ms 494.7 ms
wuffs: 14.9 ms 0.0 ms
mango: 10.0 ms 84.7 ms
// image: 312 x 442 (43 KB) 32bpp
libpng: 2.9 ms 18.3 ms
wuffs: 0.4 ms 0.0 ms
mango: 0.1 ms 7.3 ms
// image: 160 x 120 (13 KB) 8bpp
libpng: 0.7 ms 9.5 ms
wuffs: 0.1 ms 0.0 ms
mango: 0.1 ms 3.2 ms
// image: 90 x 112 (23 KB) 24bpp
libpng: 0.9 ms 3.9 ms
wuffs: 0.5 ms 0.0 ms
mango: 0.2 ms 1.3 ms
Recently I went through the attic and found an old laptop (120Mhz CPU, 32Mb RAM, low-RPM 810Mb HDD) with Win98 installed on in. To my amazement it could boot and start Excel and Word within 10sec. Compared to my workstation (20 cores + HT @ 2.5Ghz, 110Gb RAM, PCIe SSD) which takes upward of 40 sec to get to the desktop.
Really makes one question the current state of software. Sure, Win7 has some more features, but imagine someone in 98 saying: "we have a great idea for a new OS, it'll have more features than Win98 and it'll only take 4 times longer to boot if you are running it on a cluster of supercomputers, but those new features are gonna be worth it" =P
Sidenote on the hardware side: The laptop had a hinge for the keyboard so you could raise it to a 20 degree angle, the CD/Floppy drive had the same connector as the battery so you could swap the drive for another battery if going on a trip. There were two sliding switches for backlight and speaker-volume. Access to the internals via a simple latch. It may have been a brick but it had interesting ideas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_ThinkPad_760
There's a lot of different crypto algorithms. Some will work better on AMD, some on Nvidia, some regardless of memory and some dependant on large cache. A miner will benchmark their card against the popular algos and choose the most profitable one. Which is one of the main complaints when Nvidia limited ETH algos, that miners would just switch to ZHash with a percentage or two less profitability and thus it would do nothing about the shortage while possibly triggering false-positives for gamers.
Indeed, people (especially politicians) seem really afraid to simply say "we don't know". Rather appeal to science as an authority that everyone agrees on. Especially when it comes to large topics like climate-change or pandemics, scientists dedicate their lives to learn about a small part; yet somehow all scientists are in agreement on whatever someone posted on social media or what a politician wants to do.
Yep, I have a old Geforce GPU with only VGA/DVI output just to use nView (although I had to modify it slightly). Such a weird thing, having a nice window manger for Windows but requiring non-technical people to buy an overpriced GPU to use it.
Stories like these are so scary because encryption is(/should be) indistinguishable from random data. Imagine being accused of some crime and the police finds a USB drive formatted by overwriting it with random data. Then the prosecutor, not having found any evidence for what you're accused of, decides to fuck you over by saying the drive contains billions in bitcoin or CP but you refuse to decrypt it.
People taking off their clothes is common with severe hypothermia. Lacerations and blunt trauma is common for avalanche victims. The soft/detachable parts (eyes, tongue) can be still eaten by scavengers while frozen.
So the only unusual part would be the radioactivity, strange lights, and what triggered the avalanche. Which could all be explained by some classified military test.
Funny how you can have a community/forum/server for years without issues but when you go against the grain new accounts come out of the woodwork to post something rule-breaking which gets the whole place shut down.
Just looking at a site like Reddit, where over the summer most major subreddits were flooded with ACAB posts and the comments said some pretty extreme stuff without issue. But then a new account on T_D, a blue-lives-matters sub, said something anti-police and that was justification for shutting it down.
Don't let your dislike of certain communities cloud your views. Punishing the lawful majority for the actions of a few, often outsiders, and letting those few define what a community supports is not something our society needs more of.
There were estimates upwards of 300K people there to peacefully protest, that some people decided to enter the building does not negate the protesting. Even if social media calls for the arrest and ostracisation of everyone within a 5 mile radius.