With this approach you would lose the subvolume structure and deduplication if I’m not mistaken.
With this approach you would lose the subvolume structure and deduplication if I’m not mistaken.
The most common physical attacks will be you misplacing your device or some friend/burglar/cop taking it. FDE works great in those scenarios.
RCS is walled off by design, so that users are dependent on Google and their phone carrier. If they wanted an open standard they would have adopted something like XMPP.
Reserved for future use
What is “southern Ireland”? Do you mean Ireland?
A lot of people seem to have forgotten this, but the American constitution was actually written by god and passed down by Moses over 2000 years ago.
Yes, it is generally a good idea to put internet-facing servers on a network that is separated from the local network. The point of this is not to minimize their attack surface (since they are already connected to the internet after all) but to prevent them from being used as a stepping stone for attacks on your internal network. To make this effective, you should block traffic from the internet-facing network to the rest of your network and treat it as potentially untrusted.
Unit tests or integration tests?
GDPR enforcement is left to the member states. The EDPB isn’t an agency, its more like all the national data protection authorities in a trench coat.
Some national authorities allow it, most don’t. The final word will be from the CJEU or the EDPB.
Applying AI-voodoo to a non-existing problem with unknown side effects? Sign me up!
It’s not. Image hosting sites have existed for decades. Websites are not liable unless they have actual knowledge of illegal content and ignore takedown requests. Stop fearmongering.
Because people are blowing this way out of proportion. Users uploading illegal content is always part of hosting a platform and lawmakers realized this decades ago. Platform hosters legally cannot be held liable for the content of their users unless they have actual knowledge of specific instances of illegal content. This is both in the US (section 230 of the Communications Decency Act) and the EU (chapter II of the Digital Services Act, previously the eCommerce directive)
I don’t want to get into the mess of the government defining what is or isn’t against the law
What does that even mean
While it’s stupid that ISPs are using their monopolies to screw consumers, the concept of data caps is not as stupid as you might think.
You’re not just paying for the connection between you and the ISP, but also all the other data links that get your internet traffic to its destination. For example, those cables across the ocean are owned third parties and they charge money for every byte that goes through. It wouldn’t be unreasonable for ISPs to pass that cost to users.
Furthermore, most links are overprovisioned in order to keep costs down. For example, if you assume that users only use 10% of their bandwidth on average, that means you can fit 10x as many people on a connection (or maybe 8x to account for peaks). This does mean that users should be discouraged from using their full bandwidth for long durations, otherwise the network operators can’t overprovision as much and have to invest more in infrastructure.
The real question is do you encrypt-and-sign or sign-and-encrypt?
It’s slightly different. Your shell will see the /*
and replace it with all the directories under /, e.g. /bin /dev /etc /home
etc. So the actual command that runs is rm -rf /bin /dev /etc /home
etc.
Put the source code in the bag and nobody gets hurt.
Just so you know, this also creates more load on other instances, especially the larger ones.
“I dropped my fair share of hard Rs back then”