jarkhen

I can't really speak to the first part of your message, since I've never really tested anything like that, but at least anecdotally I've never really noticed any additional click latency in Linux compared to Windows.

For the second -- FFXIV works flawlessly _once you get it set up_, but there's a couple tweaks to deal with to get there -- the launcher in particular (the default/"modern" launcher doesn't play nice). Games with separate launchers in general seem to have more issues/be more finicky in Proton. I don't personally use ACT, so I don't know if there's any real issues with setting it up, but I know others on Linux who do so it's at least possible. For your reshade concerns, GShade[1] comes with a linux install script that I've had no issues with.

[1]: https://gposers.com/

Believe it or not, League of Legends actually works pretty well on Linux (I run it through Lutris). It takes a while for the launcher to initially load on startup, and the launcher is a bit of a slow/laggy mess, but from what I hear from my Windows friends the latter at least is just a general LoL launcher problem more than a Linux problem. Once you actually load into a game it runs completely flawlessly, with great performance.

With all the work that's gone into Proton over the past few years, the vast majority of games Just Work and there's very well-documented tweaks for making the vast majority of the rest work as well. It's relatively rare to have a game that's completely unplayable on Linux, unless it's hampered specifically by anti-cheat software that doesn't like Linux.

> I'm not sure how one could avoid dressing to express oneself, to at least some degree, unless you exclusively wear work uniforms or hand-me-downs.

Exclusively wearing work uniforms (outside of work) or hand-me-downs is still, in its own way, expressing oneself. One way or another you make a personal decision on how to dress and whether to follow a particular style, trend, price point, etc. and that reflects something about you.

> My company doesn't even hash passwords...

I understand this is somewhat my privilege speaking here, but I don't think I could continue working at a company that didn't do something as basic as hashing passwords (and refused to prioritize fixing that as soon as I pointed it out). It's a massive ethical, if not legal (IANAL), liability -- and a huge breach of users' trust. It's 2021, hashing user passwords is astonishingly easy; I can't imagine any remotely justifiable excuse for something like that.

That protects against an attacker reading network traffic. It does not protect against an attacker that has the hashed password from the DB.

The only thing you need in order to authenticate at any given time is the hash of (hashed password + nonce). The latter you get for free, at any time, from the server, so you only need to know the hashed password -- not the password itself. Since the hashed password is directly stored in the DB, if you get your hands on that you can authenticate.

Ah, right, I misread the original description of what they were doing.

As is, then, it really is just making the hashed password the new password. If I can get the hashed password out of the DB, I can load the login page and simply skip the initial hashing step that's done on the frontend. I now have access to the account without ever knowing the original password.

If the string changes each time, how could they possibly have the matching hashed password stored in the database?

Unfortunately, your interpretation of facebook's motives require trusting that they'll only do what their PR says they'll do, and not what they're able to do. Or, even if that is their current reasoning, one then has to trust that they won't then take advantage of said ability in the future.

For many of us, facebook's past actions are more than enough to prove that they do not deserve the benefit of the doubt in this case.

Was there no concern about an attacker being able to -read- the contents, as well?