

Malicious compliance is when you follow a order or law knowing that it will backfire on those who issued it.
“Lawfare” is a comparable term but not quite it (basically legal harassment campaigns).
Cryptography nerd
Fediverse accounts;
Natanael@slrpnk.net (main)
Natanael@infosec.pub
Natanael@lemmy.zip
Bluesky: natanael.bsky.social
Malicious compliance is when you follow a order or law knowing that it will backfire on those who issued it.
“Lawfare” is a comparable term but not quite it (basically legal harassment campaigns).
This affects the view of posts via the bluesky servers, but not via mirrors or other servers
And the use of content addressing means you can be sure it hasn’t been modified
Several Android manufacturers have their own settings in the OS for battery longevity (automatic schedule based smart charging, or charging limits)
Don’t think it’s native in Android. Charging limits need support in the charging controller chip, plus driver support in the OS.
I use my backup headphones when my Bluetooth headset has run out of battery
Wireguard is most reliable in terms of security. For censorship resistance, it’s all about tunneling it in a way that looks indistinguishable from normal traffic
Domain or IP doesn’t make much of a difference. If somebody can block one they can block the other. The trick is not getting flagged. Domain does make it easier to administer though with stuff like dyndns, but then you also need to make sure eSNI is available (especially if it’s on hosting) and that you’re using encrypted DNS lookups
I did pay attention, and I saw noone serious think that would be legal to do
The biggest errors was not pushing harder against his first campaign, not pushing harder during the impeachments, letting Jan 6 go without another impeachment, and not calling out the billionaires helping his campaign with the intent to dismantle agencies that protect people, etc.
The SCOTUS appointments were big issues but due to the timing meaning they happened when dems lacked majorities there wasn’t much to do about them. Getting Trump out of the office is the only fix.
Only exception would’ve been SCOTUS reform immediately after Biden’s election when he had a majority, but the problem there is he couldn’t get enough votes for it
How were they supposed to override the “turtle” though? Sure they should’ve fought harder, but what legal options were there?
You’re missing important factors like Trump getting help from SCOTUS and agency heads bowing down to him. Biden would never have been allowed to do a fraction of this because none of it would’ve reached the enforcement stage
Yup, don’t be sole owner if you can’t afford a lawyer to make sure you get a good deal
And you can have a union even in a co-op (would mostly help if the majority / appointed leaders make decisions that break some rules, think enforcing safety rules and such)
You could also Steve Jobs yourself with a treatable but deadly disease
Your workaround is precisely why I said “more practical”. Any updates to your tooling might break it because it’s not an expected usecase
You don’t want FIDO2 security tokens for that, use an OpenPGP applet (works with some Yubikeys and with many programmable smartcards). Much more practical for authenticating a server.
BTW we have a lot of cryptography experts in www.reddit.com/r/crypto (yes I know, I’m trying to get the community moved, I’ve been moderating it for a decade and it’s a slow process)
The Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem isn’t subjective, it’s physics.
Your example isn’t great because it’s about misconceptions about the eye, not about physical limits. The physical limits for transparency are real and absolute, not subjective. The eye can perceive such flashes of objects that takes less than a thousandth of a second. The reason we rarely go above 120 Hz for monitors (other than cost) is because differences in continous movement barely can be perceived so it’s rarely worth it.
We know where the upper limits for perception are. The difference typically lies in the encoder / decoder or physical setup, not the information a good codec is able to embedd with that bitrate.
Newer fractional arithmetic encoding can get crazy
Why use lossless for that when transparent lossy compression already does that with so much less bandwidth?
Opus is indistinguishable from lossless at 192 Kbps. Lossless needs roughly 800 - 1400 Kbps. That’s a savings of between 4x - 7x with the exact same quality.
Your wireless antenna often draws more energy in proportion to bandwidth use than the decoder chip does, so using high quality lossy even gives you better battery life, on top of also being more tolerant to radio noise (easier to add error correction) and having better latency (less time needed to send each audio packet). And you can even get better range with equivalent radio chips due to needing less bandwidth!
You only need lossless for editing or as a source for transcoding, there’s no need for it when just listening to media
Except Opus. Beats it at most bitrates
[Windows subsystem] for [executable environment] is the naming scheme. The default is Win32, there’s one for POSIX (practically never used), and Linux runs in another.
https://stackoverflow.com/a/41409419