Comment Probably BS (Score 1) 247
But that's what they told POTUS because he'd brag about means and methods.
But that's what they told POTUS because he'd brag about means and methods.
The best part about smart TVs is that they DO collect your data. This supplements the price of the TV and lets you get one for much cheaper. With the money you save you can buy a streaming device (Chromecase/AppleTV/Shield/etc), ideally using this device and never even connecting your TV to the network/wifi/internet. In the end you have a cheaper TV, and you have a platform that you choose (Apple/Roku/Google/etc), and your sharing less of your data.
Sadly while your logic sounds spot on, the reality is, that TV still does ACR (basically hashing each screen sometimes multiple times a second) and builds one hell of an accurate profile of everything you watch. Even if the source is HDMI. And it's still sold.
Food for thought, that HDMI cable to your dedicated device, it likely supports networking, so the TV has a path to the internet even if you don't connect an ethernet cable directly to it, or add in your wifi creds.
I’m going to assume you have zero personal faults
Drink and driving is not a mistake or a personal fault. It's a conscious and truly FUCKING DUMB decision that should have significant consequences for you personally and no one else.
Comparing it to diabetes is just stupid. No one killed anyone else by getting diabeties, unless they accidentally sat on them.
I've heard of traffic 'accidents' where a diabetic went hypoglycemic, passed out, and drove into other cars, pedestrians, etc. For some reason the news always reports it as a 'medical event', but the point is, people are killed by diabetics due to their diabetes way too often. It is an apt analogy. An idiot decides to drink and drive an puts people at risk. An idiot with diabetes fails to control their blood sugar and decides to drive, putting people at risk.
I got skills you don't know about, man. I could fix it.
Yeah, it's easy to add more code to fix stuff that should be deleted. Just have the launcher code call your new code which bypasses all the old code. The old code can happily remain, it'll just never be called. No special skills required. If you look at the windows codebase, you'll see this technique everywhere.
Thanks for your questions, Freenet caches data but it isn’t meant to be a long-term storage network. It’s better to think of it as a communication system. Data persists as long as at least one node remains subscribed to it. If nobody subscribes (including the author), it will eventually disappear from the network. So yes, if only your node subscribes then the data will only exist there and won’t be available when your machine is offline. But if other nodes subscribe it will be replicated automatically and remain available even if your node goes offline.
Not from 2023, the linked video is from last month. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
The Slack exchange from one junior staffer to a friend absolutely doesn't reflect our values or how we operate.
Actually, I'm pretty sure it does.
My mother is dead. But thanks for playing.
And she's probably still a threat to national security!
If you had no optical drive, no sound card, and no NIC...MAYBE 30 seconds. I'm highly skeptical of a 3 second boot to Windows 3.1. I put in a lot of time optimizing autoexec.bat and config.sys for various use cases, such as DOS gaming, Windows productivity, etc. Those machines were not fast enough for a 3sec boot. It took longer than that to load himem.sys and emm386.exe.
Agreed, I had a 486DX2-50 from Dell. At best, I got it to boot into windows 3.1 on Dos 6.22 in about 25 seconds. That was with the HDD in DMA mode, and a heavily optimized config.sys and autoexec.bat. Unfortunately just the POST ate up 10 seconds.
The OP's claim of 3 seconds is ludicrous. Maybe on a modern VM emulating a 486?
The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from. -- Andrew S. Tanenbaum