conciselyverbose

There are a bunch of free channels on the internet that some TVs can just stream without a dedicated app. These channels are supported by ads like cable/whatever channels, but not locked behind a subscription. VLC is supporting whatever formats they use to allow (or make it easier; IDK) people to watch them if they want.

The other part is that they’re working on web assembly to allow sites to use VLC as their embedded video player.

If you don’t immediately throw someone who doesn’t flush off of your property to never return, you’re nasty too.

Discord supports threaded topic based formats as well.

The reality is that for a lot of interactions, a live chat feels better than a forum post. You can very easily do both on discord, though.

It’s not perfect, but the alternatives that aren’t a whole project by themselves building a tool don’t have feature parity, or the user base.

“Monitors” are smaller.

And the minimum cost of entry to anything reasonably sized is double to triple. Changing some settings is well worth it.

I’ve had decent experience with nobara with a 2080. I had a couple hiccups early, and had to reinstall basically right away, but after that it’s been solid.

(Humans behavious still mostly eludes me though, totally illogical 🤨)

We’re not rational, but there are patterns. If you’re willing to do some reading Thinking: Fast and Slow is beefy, but helps to show some of the patterns of irrationality in a structured way, from one of the leading experts on human behavior. If that’s too much, Thinking in Bets is a nice taster that still is well backed by much of the same research, but is shorter and more accessible.

The “key” is the mapping of cipher alphabet to message alphabet.

There has to be a secret to be cryptography. The meaning has to be hidden without the secret information (though primitive/weak attempts can have a small enough search space to be brute forced). But the content being hidden without that information is the entirety of what the word means.

That’s a terrible definition, but “codes” is doing the heavy lifting.

It is not a code, in that definition, if it does not require knowledge of a key to decode.

It is literally impossible for anything that doesn’t have a secret key to qualify as cryptography. That is the entire defining trait.

Wow that’s hilariously idiotic.

Because it’s a giant one.

There is no valid interpretation of cryptography that resembles the way you defined it in any way.

If the source isn’t available at all, yeah. Which is why I brought up the FTC to begin with (since Google is in the US).

But I doubt they’d act if the license isn’t permissive enough.

The FTC takes action against false advertising.

“Open Source” doesn’t have a singular legally relevant definition no matter what organizations claim otherwise, though.

You provided a definition that doesn’t even loosely resemble the correct one.

There’s no need to use words you don’t understand, especially when they’re wildly unrelated to whatever you’re saying. They just add confusion.

If the word “cryptography” here is what throws anyone off, it’s not some advanced field of study, it just refers to the physical manifestation of messaging, which a child can get behind.

No it doesn’t. Cryptography is specifically encoding messages in a way that is hard for someone without the specific secret key to decode, even if they know the methodology.

I don’t understand ever under any circumstances having your phone on anything but vibrate.

It already has legitimacy. It’s their hardware that doesn’t, despite the decent raw flops and high memory.

I’m not sure what you think is contradicting me. I put “free” in quotes. But they’re not making meaningful additional license purchases by changing the name from 10 to 11 with how much they’re begging people to upgrade. And Mac straight up makes zero from licensing fees, so again, a new name doesn’t mean anything. They abandon hardware with new versions when enough core functions need hardware features to work properly, which happens regardless of what they call it.

Enterprise pays plenty for Windows, but those licenses are all subscription based so new versions don’t mean anything there either.

It’s CBS. The NFL doesn’t run the broadcast. But not Taylor Swift lol. I don’t think she even did anything to draw attention to it besides existing.

I actually enjoyed seeing her in the stands, though. She was very clearly emotionally invested in the game, and I thought her reactions were genuine and added to the broadcast.

Because she’s that popular.

I’m willing to bet there were a comfortable 7 figures worth of extra viewers just because she was at the game.

Pay what?

Mac hasn’t charged for an OS in ages, and Windows has given “free upgrades” for several version because they’re stealing more data and want people to switch.