I forgot about /proc and I think there's also another filesystem that's relevant, /sysfs. The original idea was to make a central /etc, but, yeah, the Registry is a bit more general than I made it sound.

grift.
an established government project that was slashed.
a limited usage project feeding from government funding.
this project has an elliptical office scat stain smell.

Also, a standard US outlet is 15A @ 120V = 1.8 kW, not 1 kW. There's a little loss so you get more like 1.7 kW into the battery.

A circuit is typically only allowed to be continuously loaded to about 80% by code, so you'd be getting about 12A or 1.44 kW into your car.

Also, 20A/120V circuits are quite common, most of my breakers are 20A.
Further, most houses also have 240V available. If / when I get an electric car, I'd have a 240V receptacle installed, which would be easy for me, since the panel is in my garage.

What's wrong with the Registry? Its original intent was to be a database of all system settings. Linux and Unix has had the same thing from the start, except that the Unix/Linux solution is a directory containing a bunch of files (that is, /etc). They both even have system wide settings trees and individual user settings trees. (On Linux, this would be the dotfiles in your user directory. On Windows, it's just a second root tree in the Registry. HKEY_LOCAL_USER\, if I remember correctly.)

Now, I'll grant you that most program settings today aren't stored in the Registry anymore, but system-wide settings still are. This is similar on Linux where a lot of configuration stuff is stored within containers like flatpaks.

While some companies allowed employees more ability to work remote due to Covid, some companies had those policies before Covid as they did not have enough office space for their employees. Now those companies are mandating workers make long commutes just to fight for desks.

I assume there was some form of contract. Generally speaking, any time you send somebody unsolicited copyrighted material, you can expect it to get summarily thrown in the trash, so whomever you sent it to can't fall for the old "you stole my idea" bugaboo.

VFX studios are already doing this for their production pipelines. The processing happens in a data center; all the artists see is essentially a terminal window. Nobody can "walk off" with anything.

This is pure speculation but what if an employee seeing all these hard drives lying around formatted them and sold them because everything is so expensive now?

I think "screener" means specifically a copy that clearly displays that it is not the release version. For example text appearing the entire movie that say "This is a screener and property of [company]". Other aspects like the movie becomes black in white randomly. Time markings appear randomly in the frame.

I think everyone here is pointing out you could read the summary past the first sentence. I would agree with you that the word "stolen" should not be in the first sentence but the rest of the summary details the situation. Netflix was given a hard drive with a movie. Netflix lost it or it is believed to have been stolen along other hard drives.

Obviously. "Guy’s got range."—Detective Peralta

Wait till he finds out about Captain Corelli's Mandolin

Remember kids, the reason we never got a Forrest Gump 2 is because the first one lost money according to Paramount. So they didn’t pay royalties to the author. The author sued and settled with Paramount for an undisclosed amount. Technically he never got royalties for Forrest Gump; Paramount paid him the money for rights to the unwritten sequel. The author then wrote Forrest Gump 2 with Forrest as the most unlikable character and put Forrest in bizarre and outlandish plot contrivances.

You asked why passengers like me would choose to fly nonstop as opposed to fly with stops. And there are many reasons why I would choose that. But according to you, I am wrong for having my own opinion.

Of course it is. You outlined all the preferences you have including using Singapore Airlines. Therefore Qantas Airlines should never create a flight you would not take. Everyone should have less choice because of your preferences.

So I should believe you over Qantas that is doing feasibility analysis. But again, Qantas should not try because you said so.

What are you talking about? That happens now. To leave Australia to London requires stops in places you may not want to stop. Also you do know that multiple airlines exist, right? If Qantas creates this flight, you can still fly your Singapore Airlines with a stop in Singapore. There are multiple airlines you will be able to choose if you want to stop. You are treating Qantas giving other people a nonstop option as them taking away your option that you would never choose. Your entire argument is everyone should make your choice.

The way this is being described is asinine. You lose a master and you're fucked, lose a copy and you still have the master. It's like words don't mean anything to these people. Additionally, fuck the studio for not encrypting it or exercising any sort of security on it at all.

Pretty much everyone in this story is a moron