sylver_dragon

That’s the Preamble to the Declaration of Independence. And for as much as it is a foundational document of the US, it’s also not a legal document.

Violence is always a bad option. Sometimes however, it’s the least bad of the bad options. And knowing when that point has been reached is incredibly hard, and often misjudged.

Not a specific word or phrase, but Google Dorking is useful for limiting down search results. Just the basics of putting things in double quotes (e.g. “Find this exact text”) and negating words/phrases (e.g. -NotThis) can go a long way in refining search results. The “filetype:” modifier is much less useful than it was a decade or two ago, as SEO assholes have gotten wise to it and so include tags to show up on results using it. The “site:” keyword can be really handy, when you are pretty sure what you want is on a specific site/domain. Or, if you are trawling a website for specific information. You can also negate the “site:” keyword. So, you can add something like “-site:expertsexchange.com” to a search and get rid of useless advertising sites.

No fair! You changed the outcome by measuring it.

While I’m all for fresh ideas, one of the advantages to sticking with well known naming is that folks will often look for those things and might end up missing the community, if the name isn’t obvious and easily searchable. While “LFG” does imply that one is looking for a group, rather than maybe just a single other person, it also has a very long history in gaming and is a well known acronym. I suspect a lot of folks are going to specifically look for that acronym when starting their search. So, I’d argue with sticking with that classic.

That said, it is your community and you should build the identity you want to build. So, don’t let some old curmudgeon like me push you away from doing something that interests you.

I’m willing to withhold judgement. But, Chosen’s website reads like bog standard vulture capital trying to pretend they are not going to ride in and enshitify anything they touch. With lots of broad claims about being “community driven” and AI art. Maybe this will work out; but, I wouldn’t be putting money on it.

That said, I don’t blame Dark0ne for wanting to step back. He’s be running this wonderful site for the community for a long time and deserves the opportunity to go do other things. I wish him the best of luck and I hope that NexusMods survives this transition.

He got tired of shoveling corporate shit and decided to put those skills to use for himself, shoveling chicken shit.

The short answer is, it’s what we were taught in school. Like many preferences, it’s shaped by the culture we grow up and live in.

I’m sorry but it doesn’t make sense to me.

Of course not, you were raised and live in a different culture; so, your preferences are different.

Ultimately, the right answer is ISO8601. It’s unambiguous and sorts well on computers. But, I don’t think any culture is teaching that as the primary way to write dates, so we’re stuck with the crappy ways.

My personal preference is to use FOSS whenever it’s practical. For home use, I’ve switched to FOSS for the vast majority of my computing needs. I run Linux on both my server and desktop. Most of the software on my server is FOSS, with the one exception being a container using the Splunk free license. My desktop is running Linux, and I use LibreOffice for documents and the like. I do run Visual Studio Code, which is technically Open Source, though I would not put it past Microsoft to do a rug-pull on that eventually. And I have an extensive library of games with Steam, basically nothing of which is Open Source.

I have reached a point, financially, that piracy is not morally defensible. And I’m not willing to get into the mire of if, or where such a line would be. I believe that creators should be rewarded for their work. Though, I also agree that the limits on copyright are way out of whack with the changes Disney has purchased through the years. So, piracy as a moral question is a murky subject, with no clear answers to me. But, the end result is that I buy games, movies or TV shows. For other software, I usually look to FOSS projects (e.g. Gimp vs Photoshop, FreeCAD/OpenSCAD vs Autodesk), free licenses (e.g. Splunk) or just do without. For TV Shows/Movies, if it’s not on one of the streaming services I subscribe to, I may buy it via a digital service; or, I do without.

No, if you open a terminal and run:
sudo dmesg

You should get a long output which is the kernel log. Assuming the crash happened recently, there may be something in the last few lines (bottom of the output) which could indicate why the process died (or was killed). Keep in mind that this is a running log; so, if it’s been a while since the crash, the entries for it may be higher up in the log. It’s often best (if you can) to trigger the problem then immediately go run the sudo dmesg command and look at the output. With luck, there will be useful logs. If not, you may need to look elsewhere.

On my system (Arch), if I have too much running, the kernel can kill processes based on resource starvation. It’s quite possible you’re running into a similar limitation. There should be a message in dmesg when this happens.

The person who authored the cheat(s) the other person is using. Because clearly, if I lost they must be cheating. /s

For many games, I’d argue that you are to blame for your loss. Assuming the game is based purely on skill, then your ability to execute said skills is the only factor which matters. Consider something like Chess, where the game is solved and one’s ability to win is really down to your ability to memorize board positions and recognize the optimal move. If you lose, it’s likely because you failed to pick the optimal path.

This is mitigated, to a greater or lesser extent in games where chance plays some role. It’s entirely possible to chose an optimal path, but have RNGesus decide that you get to lose today. Some games provide some ability to manage the risks created by randomness, but you often have some reliance on “luck”. Obviously, the more luck dependent a game is, the less control you have over winning/losing.

And then there is the issue of other players who can affect the outcome. If you play a game where there are more than two players, the other players may be able to change the course of the game enough that, no matter how well optimized your choices, you cannot win. This leads to the classic “kingmaker” problem in board games. It may be that someone who is themselves unable to win is in a position to directly effect the outcome of the game in such a way as to make another player win or lose. So, maybe you played a very good game, but the kingmaker decides that you lose.

Ultimately, the answer to the original question is, “it depends”. And there are a lot of factors one must look at to come to an answer. And that answer is unlikely to be whole one thing or the other.

It’s a matter of circumstance. Authoritarianism is only useful in situations where time pressures make the slow, deliberate decisions of democracy unworkable. Combat is a good example of this. When the shells are raining down around you, there isn’t really time to hold a vote on how to proceed. So, in such situations there is usually a chain of command which is given authoritarian control. Other emergent situations will also often require similar levels of top-down control. The person in charge may not make the best or fairest decisions in the heat of the moment. But, inaction will almost certainly be a worse choice.

The other side of this is, when the situation isn’t emergent, a democratic (well, really semi-democratic, but I’m going to use “democratic”) system is likely the best choice. And those democratic systems would be wise to prepare for the emergent situations by identifying and designating the people who will be handed dictatorial control when the fecal matter hits the air circulator. And the system for identifying when the emergency has ended, how dictatorial power is unwound and how the performance of the person handed that power is to be judged.

The reason I hedged with “semi-democratic” is that a truly democratic system can have issues too. The classic “tyranny of the majority” problem. As any majority could override the rights of a minority in a truly horrible fashion. The solution being things like constitutional democracies, where the power of the majority is limited in specific ways (e.g. unrevokable rights).

No, but the country has problems. It’s always had problems. Even with all of the economic hardship and political strife we have today, most people are safer, healthier and have better prospects today than they have had in most of US history. It’s by no means perfect and we have a lot of work to do. But, giving up and checking out has never improved anything. It also doesn’t help that we have a steady drip-drip-drip of negative information fed to us by our phones and algorithms. We are also facing one of the largest Constitutional Crises in US History, with the President pushing the boundaries of his Constitutional powers. Even if nothing breaks, we are likely to see many changes from all this. Hopefully, those changes result in better guardrails on the Presidency. And maybe even a repudiation of the Roberts Supreme Court. But, such a future is hard to see when we are in the middle of the storm.

I even have hope for the slight voting majority which put Trump back in power. It’s easy to dismiss those folks as a bunch of <insert invective terms here>. And some of them almost certainly fit those descriptions. However, there are a lot of them which are just scared and confused by the FUD sandwich being fed to them by the 24-hour news cycle, social media algorithms and politicians looking for easy votes. It’s going to be hard work to pull them back off the brink. And if you’re not up to that work, I understand. It’s hard to want to put in the effort for folks who seem so far gone. I’ve spent a lot of hours arguing with folks with whom I disagree wholeheartedly. It’s tiring and I can only take so much before I decide it’s time to move on for a while. But, I would rather keep up the argument than let the country slide into full blown autocracy.

So ya, I have hope. It’s a grim hope and one which recognizes that we could lose. But, giving up now feels premature.

When people stop believing that justice is possible via the government system, they will seek it through other means. It doesn’t make it right, but it does provide a warning that the system is failing.

And from both of their perspectives, it doesn’t matter. Continuity of consciousness really only matters in the future, not the past. If I die every night when I go to sleep and a brand new me, with all of my memories wakes up the next day, to that future me life is fine (at least until he dozes off). For past me, well they ceased to exist and there’s no point agonizing over their deaths. To current me, falling asleep then becomes a terrifying experience, as that means oblivion for me, and fuck that future doppelganger me. In the Prince’s scenario, unless he plans to piss off another witch, what happened to the previous him isn’t really important. For the princess, it’s even less important, as there is really no difference, from her perspective, of the two paths to arrive at now.

That depends on the use case. For drive encryption, a centrally assigned and managed password is fine. It provides for protection of data at rest while also ensuring that a single point of failure (the user) won’t remove access to the data contained on the encrypted volume. Since it’s not intended to prove identity, that risk needs to be mitigated by a different control.

At most organizations I have worked at (both IT and cybersecurity), decryption keys will be centrally managed. With some technologies (e.g. Bitlocker), it’s possible to have multiple passwords which can be used to decrypt the drive, and it could be possible for the user to have one only they know. However, there isn’t a logging mechanism to verify which password was used to unlock the drive, leaving the issue of non-repudiation. This could probably be fixed by having some sort of system which logs which user unlocked the drive, but that would be a very hard thing to do securely. Any such log would need to be in a space the bootloader can reach and write to, and now that location needs to be secured in a way which prevents a malicious actor from modifying the log. At that point, we’re quickly arriving at having TPM and we might as well go whole hog and just do TPM and secure boot. Which is a great bit of technology; but, now only proves that the system hasn’t been tampered with.

As a tangent, the reason most organizations centrally manage drive encryption keys is the need to unlock the drive, in the event the user is no longer able to. If you win the lottery, turn your laptop in and run off to parts unknown, the organization may want to unlock the laptop to recover anything you were working on. So, they need access to the decryption key.

Ultimately the problem is that the encryption password and your user account password are solving different security problems and there isn’t a lot of good overlap between the two.

I have a 6 year old phone which gets charged overnight as I sleep. It still makes it though the day. What the heck are you running which is chewing up your battery so badly?

If the device is encrypted and single-user there is no good reason to require further login after the first.

The reason is non-repudation. Ignoring the fact that the drive’s encryption should have been handled by TPM and not be bothering the user, the drive encryption password does not establish who is using the laptop, only that they know the unlock password. Unfortunately, those unlock password are usually centrally assigned and managed, which means that they are not something that only the user knows. Also, it doesn’t have a good second factor. If the laptop is stolen, there is nothing keeping an attacker out, if they know the password. Their account, on the other hand, should have a password only the user knows. Yes, central IT can reset the password, but this creates logs which show the reset and can be used to prove that the password was reset, and who reset it. And the user’s password can be backed up with a second factor. So, a stolen laptop isn’t an easy on-ramp to the organization’s network.

As for logins after that, it gets harder to justify. OS, email and most web portal logins should be handled via SSO. For most users, this should mean that their drive gets decrypted via TPM, they type their password into the OS login prompt, deal with 2FA and that’s it. For users with admin access to stuff, there will be a separate login step when they need to elevate permissions, but that should largely be limited to IT staff and developers. For the original poster, it sounds like their organization’s IT is being run on a shoestring by someone who either doesn’t know or isn’t allowed to do it well.