No, I think more MS users = MS shady shit. So, to discourage MS shady shit, I encourage people to not use MS software. I also think that people who are worried about abuse by priests should not tithe or otherwise donate to Catholic churches (belief matters less than action here; and it’s less reasonable to swap out belief system, I guess.)

That’s why your analogy seems backwards to me.

Doesn’t matter anyway. I guess I just don’t get it. Have a nice day.

The VM protects somewhat from network attacks and spread. But, I do imagine most vulnerabilities of Win10 would still be exploitable, and you would be sacrificing some performance, yes.

I didn’t like the name, but it was a nice option for Nvidia laptops esp. from System76.

I ended up replacing it with Ubuntu; but I can’t remember exactly why. I normally use Debian.

I’m not sure I get the analogy here… Do you think there will be less abuse by priests if there are more Catholics?

I’m been using Linux full time since 2004, and while I think it is good to let people know it is there, I don’t recommend it to people I’m not willing to personally support. But, I also let them know I just can’t help with Windows problems either, and they should address their complaints to their OS vendor.

I file Debian bugs if I have a problem with my OS, and have received fixes that way. This is better support that I ever received from MS during my first 2 decades of using MS OSes.

Don’t they make all their money on hats?

Yeah, we’d have to shift tactics. But, without IP law protections, the hacker community would double down on reverse engineering and binary patching. Debian etc. would still be available, but you’d also see spins on Adobe, Apple, Microsoft, and Google software based on decompiling, patching, and rebuilding, or just game genie / PC game cracks binary patching based on offset and signature.

The DMCA would dissolve and encrypted data that was expected to be decrypted on the fly (“streaming only”) would just be published fully decrypted.

It would be a revolutionary shift, but I’m not convinced it would be worse.

What would be worse is keeping IP law, but only having it enforced by million dollar yearly budget teams of lawyers and not protecting creators from having their works fed to “AI” and regurgitated as slop.

/s ?

You know, I bet there’d be a lot fewer pretty crimes if we were all given a 1600/mo UBI.

While I don’t doubt this, I’m also sure that tarrifs will also affect the pricing/availability of utility (non-status symbol) mobile devices.

We are going to have to deal with this for 4 years (unless some Rs will vote the remove in 2) and recovery won’t be immediate. I hope my current mobile lasts that long, but I usually only get about 3 years out of a battery. Replacement parts will be hit by tarrifs, too.

I enjoyed legacy. It wasn’t the movie I was expecting, and it has rough parts, but overall I found it fun, particularly the action scenes and the sound track.

I will also plan to see this one.

I think that reveals you aren’t a “normal” request. Since “normal” user requests don’t have that exact list of fonts. I’m anonymous, but aberrant.

“Just” remove a random 2.5% of the fonts, a different random set per request (context).

You might like (or have already seen): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPp-U4QonnM

I’m almost certain they mean Reddit, but there are a lot of sites that aren’t lemmy.dbzer0.com … like lemm.ee and infosec.pub … even some sites that aren’t Lemmy instances like infosec.exchance or hachyderm.io.

I have 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 in my resolver configuration. I’ve heard that 9.9.9.9 might not be poisoned like this. Besides running my own DNS (not even on a dare), is there a good way to get uncensored DNS resutls?

removing copyright entirely would benefit society

I could be convinced of that.

I think extreme reform would be of more benefit. Copyright as-is is an active harm.

Copyright IS about protecting creators

No, it isn’t. The intent WAS to “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts”. The reality IS that it harms society, by benefiting only the already powerful.

I believe that the protection copyright provides is proportionate to how much you can spend on lawyers. So, no protection for the smallest creators, and little protection for smaller creators against larger corporations.

I support extreme copyright reform, though I doubt it should be completely removed.

The reason copyright exists is for the same reason patents do: to protect the little guy.

If you actually believe this is still true, I’ve got a bridge to sell ya’.

This hasn’t been true since the '70s, at the latest.