Top up your GoogleBux Account so you can spend GoogleCoinz to see the adve... I mean... articles you want to read!

• 1 GoogleBux = 282 GoogleCoinz
• 1 GoogleCoinz = 0.0336 USD

*You cannot purchase in denominations smaller than 12 GoogleBux. GoogleBux expire after 27 days. The cash value of 1 GoogleCoinz is determined by a formula that includes the rate of inflation, the price of a stadium hotdog, and an evil co-efficient of our Dark Lord's design.

Weird, since you don't seem to understand what it is.

Net neutrality opposes, for example, an ISP blocking a customer's traffic to/from Netflix unless the customer pays an extra fee.

It's not about censorship, rather it's about service providers treating all Internet traffic equally and not creating artificial tiers of Internet access so ISPs can milk more money from their (often locked-in) customer bases.

Being opposed to crappy ISP pricing structures and being opposed to state-mandated censorship are not the same thing.

Bridge analogy is idiotic, but let's run with it.

Company A builds a bridge. Company A also builds cars. Company A sells millions of cars and says "If you want to cross the bridge, you have to use one of our cars and you have to pay a toll."

Company B comes along and builds a different bridge that goes to the same place, but charges lower tolls and invites company A's cars to use it. Some car owners would rather use that bridge. Company A says "You can use that bridge, but Company B has to pay us every time one of our cars crosses it."

Company B says that Company A's customers should be able to use whatever bridge they want without Company A taking money from them. Company A laughs and wipes its ass on a European flag.

2 of my 5 immediate colleagues have been playing it since its first day of release and have been singing its praises. It's all over YouTube like a rash. I'm willing to bet at least 50% of those with Game Pass subscriptions have at least tried it, since they've already paid for it.

Regardless, anecdotal evidence is not a very useful metric.

(I also don't believe you asked everyone in the comedy clubs, but it's amusing to think you did.)

The post I'm replying to isn't a troll post and it's unfair to mod it as such.

The Hyland wind farms are owned and operated by energy companies that are, primarily, fossil fuel companies; Equinor (i.e. the Norwegian state oil company) and Masdar which is essentially the greenwashing offshoot of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company.

These companies touted that they were using energy derived from this specific windfarm to power their oil and gas drilling platforms in the North Sea. Essentially drilling non-renewables using renewable energy. The idea that this is environmentally responsible behaviour is risible.

There's nothing woke about noticing that certain special interests in the energy industry might be doing some sleight-of-hand to distract people while they desperately suck all the oil and gas out of the North Sea as quickly as possible.

I live in Scotland, btw.

That's what I'm thinking too. Likely they did a small-scale pilot and it didn't go well, so now they're throwing the brakes on until Azure gets its act together.

Might be a while...

See in TFS where it says Microsoft bought LinkedIn in 2016?

So yeah, it probably is just you.

Speaking from personal experience, management don't care what the actual risk is. Red number in Nessus = bad, that's all they know. We can write a treatise on why these detections don't represent actual vulnerabilities, which management will simply not understand and disregard, or we can tell the users their old but still functional software is going away.

On the bright side, we've managed to get several departments to spend money on software maintenance so at least we can run the most recent versions of the detected applications, which usually do have security fixes in them - and if they don't then finally management will accept the risk and let us just mitigate. The flipside is the business is spending a lot more money on updating software that "worked fine" and wasn't actually vulnerable but had an old library or two included.

I've found most security scanning software is worse than AV software for false-positives. As you say, they have absolutely no idea what the context is, it's just "this file exists, therefore you're vulnerable".

Unfortunately, for certain security "qualifications", at least in the UK, you have to run these scans and prove that you're not vulnerable to pass. It's a great gift to the companies that make security scanning software, and it's a nice bonus for the publishers of all the software we're now paying maintenance on, but the security impact is... minimal.

Is... is this a joke?

Yes, there are Apple ports of Doom. There's even native Apple Silicon binaries floating around. Google it.

It was tested with and is recommended to be run with GZDoom. Apparently nobody reads readme files anymore, so here's a relevant section:

I can't be the only one who thinks this sweater isn't actually ugly. I'd unironically wear it.... well, unless it got creased, then I'd iron it.

Sorry.