stoltzmann

OpenWRT is very good, but the installation and upgrades are not easy.

The solution is to use image-builder and bake your config into the image.

Facebook already requires verifying your ID in some cases, it's absolutely feasible for them to do it online.

If it's not feasible, I can see an argument that large enough companies should be required to provide in person support options.

Facebook defintely has enough money to facilitate this.

The result is that European hi-tech entrepreneurs create their businesses in a friendlier environment, which is usually the USA.

The inverse of that is that this creates a huge market in the EU, where you don't have to be the best in class and the most capitalistic - you can be good enough and still make a good buck serving local clients.

I've implemented timers that had timeouts using unix timestamps, but only for multiplayer - when a player's attempt to connect to the server times out, etc.

Inside the game loop, we would keep the global tick counter that incremented on every tick, and timeouts would be based on that rather than on UTC.

The tick counter was updated only when the game logic was actually running. Our approach to pausing was to not run the functions that handled frame updates or physics updates, and to only run the rendering functions.

Generally we would never care about actual world time other than for some timeouts like for network (as the time passes for everyone), or for easter eggs like changing the tree models for Christmas or so.

I don't think anyone serious would implement event timers based on real time.

I can assure you from having flown around a lot, if you are wildly outnumbered 3 SU-27 (err, F15) to your 1 F-18 you do not attempt a radar lock you do an IR only attack. The article mentions getting a radar lock first but that is unnecessary for IR guided weapons and in a 3-1 situation will just get you shot down.

Slaving heatseekers to radar is the standard way of employing them. I reckon by "having flown around" you're referring to DCS, which is absolutely unrealistic when it comes to engagements.

Clearly any passive IR detector thats theorized to exist for years either doesn't exist or doesn't work very well. In theory, a smart enough IR camera should be able to notice something very warm indeed is getting rapidly brighter as it approaches you. In practice, these don't exist, or don't work. "Oh yeah they didn't have those when I was in, but they totally have them now" for the last 30 years. Apparently, not yet in 2026.

MAWS exist and they're employed on a lot of aircraft. I don't believe Strike Eagles have them though. An F-35 would get a missile warning for a heatseeker, it's not science fiction technology for quite a while now.

I find it unfortunate that people who do this for a living can't legally comment, people who do this for a hobby are not asked or actively ignored despite extensive practical experience, and people who mostly have a grift of looking authoritative for legacy media get automatic blind belief despite sometimes spouting total nonsense.

You don't get practical experience by playing flight simulators, it's not comparable to how planes are employed as weapons systems.

It certainly feels like we are being squeezed from all sides. I think the push to require ID verification for websites is also part of the plot - it all feels too coordinated, like governments all over the world have the same exact agenda to destroy our privacy. At some point you will have to verify your ID to use any computer system, and it will act just as a terminal to the cloud.

I guess we will get the future that was seen in Sun Microsystems with their Ray thin clients after all, but in a way that will provide complete control over population rather than mobility.

What is in cards for us is complete slavery to digital systems.

And IIRC ammo for heavy and health for soldier!

Stop being a clown and just write down the fucking name if you want to complain that badly.

connected to their wifi

Absolutely, it's their own network.

being brought to their premises

Depends on the local laws. Where I live, they can either deal with it, or provide a secured storage space for the duration of the visit.

Either way, if a corporation wants their employees to use a device, they are obliged to make one available. Surrendering your private equipment to their management makes it not yours anymore.

Many corporations require personal devices be managed to support remote wiping.

Corporations cannot require you to have your personal devices be managed by them. If you're surrendering your own gear to a company, it stops being your own device.

So a reimplementation, not a rewrite.

This is besides the point. The lead dev started going on a rant when facing a comment as simple as "this is informative, and unfortunate" on a video that he didn't like, and is unable to parse that statement as anything else but a personal attack at him. He threatened banning Louis over that unless he completely gave in. You can see the whole discussion in the video linked in the post above.

It's a communication issue at the core, and always doubling down is not making it any better.

It portrays the whole project as being unreliable.

He didn't step away. He made a post where he "stepped down" as the project lead and instead got replaced by a "GrapheneOS Foundation director", of which there are 3 including him.

That post has been deleted.

As far as I can tell, nothing has changed other than obscuring the leadership of the project a tiny bit. strcat is still active here in the comments.

Damn, if only we had some form of technology that would let a user allow or reject access to system APIs. Sadly this is impossible and cannot be implemented.

I would say that not having any video output is a worse user experience than having blurry video output.

F-16 was the first inherently unstable jet fighter, and the first one that featured a full fly-by-wire system with no backup. If you want a jet that is completely impossible to fly without a computer, F-16 is already one of them - there is nothing special with the F-35 about that.

Well, he did facilitate drug trade. I wouldn't call that "not doing anything wrong".

Whether you believe it's morally right or wrong, that doesn't matter - he did violate several high profile laws.

By for example destroying the enemy launch platforms. By intercepting enemy flights that would deploy those weapons. And specifically in case of F-35s, also by providing ELINT.

"Hypersonic" weapons used in current conflicts are nothing more than a glorified long range missiles that are useless if you can't launch them from the air. They're also currently statistically not significant due to their low amounts.

Both me and my friend are playing on the community server where the cheaters are banned, neither of us are getting eaten.

And the admins, even paid ones working for big corporations, have finite patience and time.

We're talking community servers here, not corporate ones.

Sure, the cheater will eventually run out of IPs. But you might as well save both yourself and the cheaters some time and hassle and just add 0.0.0.0/0 and [::]/0 to your IP banlist right now. You will effectively end up with the same result if you're willing to chase every cheater across the address spectrum.

It's not going to end up with 0/0 as the final result. You're assuming that almost any address is available to the cheaters, but that's simply not true. By blocking datacenter IP ranges and Tor exit nodes, you've stopped most of the ways cheaters can easily change their IPs.

You ban their own home IP address, and what are their options? 1. They get a VPN and don't make it through because that IP is already blocked. 2. They hope their ISP allocates a random IP from a range, so if that works they come back and they instead get a range ban. 3. They get a residential VPN and start burning through those precious IPs.

You don't have to chase cheaters if you're running a server. You ban them once or twice and call it a day.

rotating through a few VPNs can easily get you a few thousand different IPs

It's not uncommon to ban all addresses coming from a datacenter, which will stop the majority of VPNs. That leaves significantly fewer addresses from residential VPNs.

IP bans means that you potentially nuke hundreds of people: between CGNAT & people playing on shared phone connections, a single IP can be allocated many times

Yep. That's collateral damage. A good server would have an appeals process to handle those cases.

but these can all be evaded

And then they'll be banned again and again. There's only a limited amount of IPs available to cheaters, it won't be long before they burn through all of them.

So which one is better? sntrup761x25519-sha512 or mlkem768x25519-sha256?

That traditional wisdom is wrong. ECC is a must-have for any computer. The only reason people think ECC is mandatory for ZFS is because it exposes errors due to inherent checksumming and most other filesystems don't, even if they suffer from the same problems.

Why not? It actually sounds like the best way to use passkeys and still have control over them.

I do not understand how this got rolled out. Surely there are _loads_ of multilingual people working at YouTube.

Simple - at Google, feedback from internal users is ignored.

You can get some other antennas, place them in the chassis and connect them to the network card. On (at least the first run of) MNT Reform laptops that's how it's done.

You could take a normal laptop and remove the screen.

It's from attacks by German submarines. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Happy_Time

Age has nothing to do with it, the interface just doesn't look like Windows 95.

The button shapes, minimize/close window buttons, the titlebar are all looking wrong for Windows 95.

It looks significantly more like Swing, but then the buttons don't match that either.