Does it actually tell you the results? I’m curious how they score your driving, and how effective it is. The scariest things I see on the road are things like:
I don’t see how they’d measure how safe a driver you are.
Perhaps it’s just that people are more careful when they know they’re being monitored, and safe drivers are more likely to opt in?
I think most orgs would want to own the server and for messages to not be end-to-end encrypted. All connections to the server would still be encrypted.
That would be more in-line with slack or something.
If you’re referring to federation specifically then that’s going to get pretty complicated with security policies.
One person has been killed and several others injured
“I was covered in coffee,” Andrew from London tells our colleagues on 5 Live.
It’s a trap.
Sounds like it’s not really a downgrade, but just an unreleased beta or test build? That seems a little less sketchy, and maybe it’ll be generally released at some point.
They would still want kernel level anti-cheat in that case.
That’s what I’m talking about though. The stupid changes usually get caught, but you still have someone there who thought it was a good idea.
Something I’ve noticed from working in a big company is that people consistently fail to predict the backlash that their policy changes will cause.
They often don’t even care all that much about the change, and if you point out that people will be upset, they agree that it’s not worth it. They just can’t relate to the people they are impacting.
I’d probably:
systemctl suspendWhen the screen fails to wake, are you able to get it back by powering it off, or by unplugging it? Is it X or wayland?
These drugs aren’t giving people the calories they need to live, so it sounds like your business depends on making people unhealthy.
Companies love getting your money early, especially with higher interest rates, so this only makes sense if the prices are going way up.
I’ve been using orgzly for years and this is the first I’ve heard of revived. Looks promising.
Oh yeah, that was pretty much the point I was trying to make too.
Of course not, but you have to either trust your users to some extent or give them a system that’s locked down to the point of hindering them.
There’s actually not that much autotools jank, really. There’s configure.ac and a few Makefile.am. The CMakeLists.txt in the root is bigger than any of those files.
There’s also some stuff from autotools archive in m4/. IMO that’s a bad practice and we should instead be referencing them as a build dependencies.
I’m not convinced this backdoor would have been significantly more difficult to hide in the cmake code.
What is ‘unallowed software’? A shell script the user wrote? Something they downloaded and compiled?
Limiting that seems fundamentally at odds with FOSS.
Emacs I assume.
cmake compiles to makefiles as well (it just also supports some other backends). I’m not sure why that matters though. In both cases the makefile is generated.
They could have been drinking the same water as the blue team. Disgusting.