My memory is hazy, but I’m pretty sure Mozilla was a package and most people just didn’t install the rest of the package. Everyone called the browser Mozilla because they didn’t use the other parts. I could definitely be wrong, though.
Trillian was definitely part of that war. I remember the daily patches to get things working again.
Trillian was not Mac only. I’ve never owned a Mac and used Trillian almost exclusively from 2002 until roughly 2009?? I can’t remember when the transition from IM to texting happened for me, but it was around then. When I was running Linux at home I would use Gaim, which was developed by a friend of the main Trillian guy.
The environmental impact of rocket launches is not good. I launch rockets for a living, including out of Vandenberg, so I’m personally invested in the ability to launch from the West Coast. It’s one thing to launch national security missions once every two months and take the hit to the environment for that, but it’s another thing to launch once a week every week to put up some disposable internet satellites so a billionaire can make more billions.
It’s only political if you think preserving the environment is political. But CA has been long-known to care about preserving the environment, so if the Coastal Commission has been able to make rulings based on environmental impact in the past then I don’t know how this lawsuit will work out. If they had asked for something reasonable like going from 6 to 12 launches, I think the commission might have been more amenable or at least open to negotiating to something like 8 or 10 launches. 50 launches is ridiculous, though.
I read some sysadmin forums about Conversation View, and most of them say users regularly ask how to turn it off. I always turn it off immediately.
I’m regretting not doing that 20 years ago.
When I left college, my university closed my email account. That sucked, but I moved on. Then the paid service I used closed down, so I had to change again. That sucked. I lost access to my Xbox Live account because they send all my “update password” emails to that old address and won’t update to my new address without confirming the change on an email that no longer exists.
Now I’ve had the same email address for 17 years and really really don’t want to move on, even though I hate that it is with Google. They went from “don’t be evil” to “be as evil as possible.”
Google glass failed for many reasons, but I don’t think privacy was one of them. Price and usefulness were the two big reasons. Tech has advanced a lot in 10 years, so the usefulness and video quality has definitely advanced; but the ratio of price to usefulness is probably not right yet.
Can’t stab me outside Pizzahut if there are no Pizzahuts around! taps head
There’s a huge difference between what a site like Reddit is used for and how Twitter is often used for. Reddit is all about discussion, so blocking discussion is bad (as you pointed out). Twitter is used a little for discussion (their character limit doesn’t really allow much discussion), but it’s mostly used for informing the world about whatever you are doing or care about. Famous people and companies use it for advertising, and normal people use it for letting people know what’s going on in their world. Stalkers can use this information to figure out where people are in the world. Being able to COMPLETELY block a stalker is a good thing. Now people with stalkers will once again be afraid to openly say what they are doing in the world.
Yes, but there is no technical justification for Spotify to not have real-time, remote access to a database, even if the database is constantly changing. We have had the technology to do that for 25 years. If Spotify is not properly handling the contracts to legally stream content, then some of the fault lays with them. Spotify is basically claiming their defense is ignorance. They can’t be held liable because they didn’t know what they could and couldn’t stream. How is that a legal justification for breaking the law? And Kobalt’s reasons for not letting Spotify know is also dumb.
Cases like this are frustrating. Spotify should NOT be able to stream any artist they want without paying them. But the judge said that’s OK because the victims waited too long to complain. The judge also said it’s totally OK that Spotify doesn’t have a list of what is legal for them to stream, simply because the list is constantly changing. This isn’t a paper list typed out by some secretary. This is a computer database that can be checked a thousand times a second.
There’s also the fact that who was the actual copyright holder was questionable and changed hands during the whole thing, so nobody knew who they should be contracting with.
The point of the sanctions wasn’t to end Huawei or slow them down in the market. It was to prevent access to specific technologies for the Chinese government. All companies in China are owned by the government, so all data gathered by companies (either from customers or from suppliers) goes directly to the government.
Also, profitability is a weird metric when a company is financially backed by a government.
I hope enough companies realize the inherent danger to their IP this feature brings. Or that the government realizes the inherent danger to CUI data and forces there to be an admin level lock of the feature so normal users can’t just turn it on.
I and many others can’t just switch to Linux because we are required to use company laptops/desktops that are admin locked.
You do know that many millions of people are given laptops/desktops for work that have locks that prevent new OS’s from being installed, right?
Right there, in plain English directly from Microsoft:
"Failed password attempts on workstations or member servers that have been locked by using either Ctrl + Alt + Delete or password-protected screen savers count as failed sign-in attempts.
The security setting allows you to set a threshold for the number of failed sign-in attempts that causes the device to be locked by using BitLocker. This threshold means, if the specified maximum number of failed sign-in attempts is exceeded, the device will invalidate the Trusted Platform Module (TPM) protector and any other protector except the 48-digit recovery password, and then reboot. "
This is capitalism 101: whatever makes the most money is what they support. It doesn’t matter who is hurt (or not hurt), or what is right/wrong. As long as they can make more money than they are losing by lawsuits, they will keep doing this. If they can avoid doing anything at all and not get sued while getting paid by customers, that’s even better.
I don’t think you’re right. Those bullets are: “The following list provides examples of common events that cause a device to enter BitLocker recovery mode when starting Windows:”
Why would entering the Bitlocker PIN too many times cause BitLocker to activate? If you are entering a BitLocker PIN then you have already activated BitLocker, right? Please explain to me why, in your scenario, I would be in the position to enter the BitLocker PIN too many times when all I was doing was restarting my tablet after an OS update.
The last bullet says it also happens when “Exceeding the maximum allowed number of failed sign-in attempts.” So even if you are correct that the first bullet is about the BitLocker PIN, then the last bullet is about failed sign-in attempts to Windows.
I like how you keep dismissing someone who is providing evidence by replying with being a jerk instead of giving helpful or factual information. You’re dying on the stupidest hill here.
Where is /c/confidentlyincorrect when you need it?
Very first goddamn bullet: “Entering the wrong PIN too many times”
As much as I hate using cash, I understand that the credit card companies charge ridiculous fees to businesses and also that people with very low income don’t always have access to digital forms of payment. Maybe Sweden does better with equipping their entire society with digital tools, but in the US I don’t think we are ready for a fully digital payment society.