Just an FYI, it’s best practice to actually type out the words the first time, then initialize them afterwards. If you never type them out, many people will have no idea what you’re talking about.

It just reads like every military dudebro’s deployment story.
“Ah yeah we had to FTP the RBO to the HEP, but before we could do that the ASO had to POI the BBU. And of course, that means we had to help the ASO set up their LKI before they could start the POI. All while EMGs were bearing down on us with their TGT-30’s. But once we got the LKI set up and the ASO was able to POI, the BBU went pretty quickly. So we got the RBO FTP’ed to the HEP in record time, and were back at the FOB by EOD.

If you’re using Windows, the built in AV (Windows Defender) is actually pretty great. Maybe run Malware Bytes every now and then, (as in, install Malware Bytes, run it, then immediately uninstall it again). Between those two (and healthy browsing habits, like using an adblocker, not downloading random .exes, etc) will keep you protected. No AV in the world will be able to fully defend against bad browsing habits, so it all really comes down to that.

But this is Lemmy, so you’re bound to get buried in “just switch to Linux cuz Windows is a virus” stuff. And while that may be true, it’s clearly not the answer to your question.

Even on the consumer side, McAfee has historically been hard to uninstall. It would do shit like leave an installer after uninstallation, so it would automatically reinstall the next time you rebooted. After running Windows’ built in uninstaller, you still have to go manually remove files to prevent it from just adding itself back again.

Yeah, my higher belt tests had us fighting two or three people at a time. It’s only for two minutes at a time, but holy fuck you feel like you ran a marathon afterwards because it’s exponentially harder than fighting just one; You can’t let yourself get pinned down or cornered, and have to constantly stay moving. You only throw the occasional punch or kick when you can find time to fit them in between all the dodging and running. The goal isn’t even to win the fight; It’s simply to avoid losing too badly. I can’t even imagine fighting five at once and coming out anywhere near the top.

Real fights aren’t like a video game where enemies circle around and attack one or two at a time. They all rush you at the same time, and if you get grabbed you’re done.

Yup. He’s “working” 7 days a week but only doing like an hour or two of actual productive (if it can even be called that…) work. This is how a lot of C-level executives use weasel words to make themselves seem important.

They’ll show up to the office at 8AM, but they’ll say that they started “working” at 6AM because they woke up and had an idea while in the shower. Then they’ll play golf with their friends (“business associates”) in the morning and say they’re working. Then they’ll go to lunch with their affair partner (“potential client”) on their way back from golf, and say they’re working. Then they’ll sit in one meeting in the afternoon, where they don’t even do any actual work but do a lot of talking with a lot of buzzwords to sound important. And finally, they’ll leave the office early and talk online about what a hard worker they are for starting work at 6AM.

The “I work 12 hours a day, 7 days a week” stuff is all just capitalistic “we deserve to get paid more because we work hard to run the companies” propaganda.

Because their entire argument thus far has basically been “but we’re a library.” But that completely misses the point that even libraries need to comply with licensing laws. Even with ebooks, they can’t just lend an unlimited number of copies. They have licensing agreements with the publishers, to be able to lend [x] copies of [y] book at a time.

They purchase digital licenses to be able to lend those books, and they can only lend as many licenses as they own. Just like physical books. They need to use time-gated DRM to automatically revoke access whenever the rental time is up.

And at first, that’s exactly what IA did. But they decided to disable that DRM, and just start lending unlimited copies to people instead, which flies in the face of established copyright law.

Reddit’s way around it is simple: Log in. Because if you’re logged in, they can associate all of your traffic with that account, thus making any VPN privacy protections essentially null. But lurking viewers (like the one in this post) will have a more difficult time with that, because it requires actually signing in.

That’s a Reddit issue; Reddit has been blocking anyone who is on a VPN but not logged in. Because they want to aggressively track your telemetry data, but a VPN makes that more difficult. So they force VPN users to sign in, so they can still track those users.

If u make privacy illegal then only cops criminals, spooks criminals, governments criminals, billionaires criminals and other criminals will have privacy. FTFY.

FTFY.

That’s $250k and 10 years per case. He leaked three separate patients’ info. HIPAA doesn’t fuck around.

Saw this on TikTok right after it happened, from two separate attendees. First was from the ground, and the second was a dude in a Ferris wheel watching the power die and realizing they were all stuck.

I’d actually be in favor of mandatory drug tests before debates. Wanna keep that war on drugs going? Put your money where your mouth is, and show us you’re not hopped up on Adderall for your debates.

Eh, kind of. Remote Desktop with an admin account would be more useful than physical access to a locked computer. Because if Bitlocker is enabled, then all that matters is that you can sign into the computer. Use strong passwords, don’t open RDP to the WAN, lock your workstations when walking away, etc…

Even cloning the drive to crack later (historically, this was a popular choice if you had physical access) is pretty useless if you don’t have a user’s password.

The Washtenaw County Prosecutor’s Office confirmed to ABC News on Wednesday that they have authorized two charges against the defendant in the case – assault with intent to do great bodily harm by strangulation, as well as assault and battery, a misdemeanor. No additional details in the case were released.

Worth noting that many jurisdictions have begun separating out attempted strangulation from regular battery/assault, because the statistics on attempted strangulation are incredibly harrowing. A victim who has been strangled by someone is 750% more likely to be murdered by that person within a year. Strangulation is a really really strong indicator of future murder. To the point that if you find out your partner has strangled someone in the past, you should strongly consider planning your escape.

There may be some correlation ≠ causation here, but it’s also interesting to theorize about why it may be so strongly correlated. Is it because murderers are naturally predisposed to strangling victims? Is it because people who strangle are more likely to ”accidentally” kill their victim during an altercation, as compared to someone who simply uses their fists? Is it because murderers tend to fantasize about or fixate on strangulation? Regardless of the reason, the stats are… Not great. This former coach has no business being anywhere near a school.

This is the highest I’ve ever seen. Also on a gaming news website.

DART rail is fine if you live near a station. The vast majority of people do not. The rail lines are alright, but the bus system is laughably bad, so getting to and from a station is often an extra hour or two just to go a few miles.

And that’s if they even serve your area. My daily commute isn’t possible via public transit, because there are no busses or trains that go anywhere near where I live. Like if I look up my commute on Google Maps, the “Bus/Train” option is just entirely greyed out.

Also odd because conservatives consistently defund public transport. In many parts of the state, there aren’t even sidewalks so you’re forced to either walk through the grass (potentially impossible if it’s overgrown or fenced) or in the middle of the street.

Their argument towards fair use wasn’t ignored. It was inapplicable.

It’s ridiculous to assume that an organization whose main purpose is data archival would knowingly and blatantly ignore copyright law

Except that’s exactly what they did. They knowingly and blatantly violated copyright law. They had a system in place to ensure fair use compliance. They intentionally disabled that system, in violation of fair use, to allow unlimited free downloads of the books they had archived.

IA’s entire argument was basically “but we’re a library” and totally missed the part where even public libraries need to comply with copyright law. Even with ebooks, they can’t simply distribute an unlimited number of copies; They have licensing agreements in place, for a specific number of specific ebooks to be checked out at any one time. And they have to use time-locked DRM to ensure compliance, by automatically revoking users’ reading ability when their check-out time is up. IA did precisely none of that.

Yeah, pretty much everyone who understands copyright agreed that this was the dumbest idea imaginable. But IA stupidly proceeded anyways, and now they’re finding out that the long studded dildo of justice rarely arrives lubed.

I love IA. I use it all the time. But this was just a blatantly stupid move. No amount of crying about it is going to change the fact that they seriously fucked up and angered the most well-established copyright holders in the world.

For those who don’t get it: If they buy from the Infowars store, those assets can be seized. If they buy from his dad, the assets are protected because his dad wasn’t the one who got sued. It’s a very blatant asset-hiding scheme.

Imagine if the owner of a big brand were going bankrupt and had to sell off all of their assets, (including the holdings for the store.) So instead, they start telling people to buy from their dad’s store, which is virtually identical in every way and the only difference is that the money ends up in your dad’s account instead of yours. It’s intentionally poisoning the asset seizure, by refusing to continue operating as a shop prior to your bankruptcy.