TheCaconym [any]

It’s good right up until the last two books or so (thinking specifically of Snuff, but also Raising Steam here), where Vimes becomes a complete parody of himself, and there is also a large drop in quality.

Maybe Pratchett’s disease had something to do with it.

These days the GNU rm specifically warns you and asks you to confirm before proceeding

One of the multiple lemmy newcomers that defederated from us; in their admins’ words, because we apparently “deny certain genocides”.

@suspended@lemmy.ml what “genocides” would those be exactly ?

Kraken, also by Mièville, is also somewhat of a match; as well as Neverwhere by Neil Gaiman.

Thank you !

I stand corrected, that does look close to noscript’s feature, thanks !

Though I don’t know if it has a “whitelist mode” (all JS disabled by default everywhere but content still fetched) like the default noscript has.

uBlock Origin does not block javascript execution depending on the domain. They do not serve the same purpose.

noscript is essential security-wise IMO

deleted by creator

Sorry, I should’ve clarified: I didn’t try it with BG3 (I use the gog version) - hence my “I don’t think so”; I simply assumed it wouldn’t work because that’s the case with like 99% of steam games.

This means Larian specifically implemented their calls to the steam API in order not to exit if it fails to connect; that’s indeed pretty good and in fact I know of only one other such exception to the rule: rimworld.

I mean, I can copy Baldur’s Gate on a PC where there’s no Steam at all and play it just fine, because the game itself doesn’t have any restrictions

I don’t think so, no. You can do that with the gog version. With the steam version it’ll try to launch / connect to the local installed steam at startup, and fails if it cannot do so. You’d need to install a steam emulator like goldberg for it to work.

This is the case with most games (there are a few exceptions) on steam, even those that don’t enforce “strong” DRM. They want steam running. This is, by itself, a completely unacceptable form of DRM.

But you’re fine with the dead and tortured sentient beings made to produce your dairy ? how does that work morally ?

Dairy is scary (CW: horror)

Go vegan already

Exactly right. I keep reading this and I never know how to respond, it really isn’t that hard and it’s worth it. I’ve posted this before here but personally I go with a postfix+mariadb+dovecot+postfixadmin+spamassassin+opendkim stack; it’s extremely easy to set up (if you read the docs) and it has suited me perfectly. Once it’s configured it’s rock solid

Beyond the obvious privacy advantages, being able to generate an email alias at any time (to the point where you can create one dedicated for each shitty thing you subscribe to) is also very useful for spam protection / infinite free trials and the like. Also aliases redirecting towards many recipients for easy organizing / mailing-list-like behaviour

Yes, but that’s almost certainly you connecting to the pop3 server (usually indeed provides TLS), or the server connecting to a dedicated smarthost for delivery (sometimes does as well). But mail exchange between MTAs that don’t use smarthosts but reach the MX destination directly is mostly unencrypted, through port 25

The answer is almost universally “no”, if you didn’t encrypt it yourself and are sending a cross-domain mail

Gmail is actually relatively chill accepting stuff from self-hosted MTAs, even new ones the IP of which hasn’t established a reputation yet

Outlook is indeed rougher but none of them even come close to the awfulness that are Apple / icloud email servers

No, I don’t, because I can afford stuff and pirating in this situation would be just pure stealing which I believe is morally wrong

Stealing suggests they don’t have the content anymore; they do. “Copying” is the word you’re looking for.

The whole “stealing” comparison rather breaks down when there is basically no scarcity / no cost to duplicating and distributing what has been produced

Even arguing it’s “stealing” because it deprives the publisher of the cost isn’t exactly true, because it only holds if you’d actually have ponied up were the content not available for free (I know for sure I definitely wouldn’t have played some games or watched some shows if I had had to actually pay for them)

You want to use something that exists thanks to capitalism

Artistic content is, believe it or not, produced outside of capitalism as well. And in capitalist societies it often is produced despite capitalism, not thanks to it, and one could argue capitalism itself is a large part of the reason that content’s quality has taken a dive over the past decades

He doesn’t want profits, quite obviously you do (and seem obsessed by it), you’re the only one doing the projecting here - along with posting pitiful platitudes that’d make a shitty linked-in life coach delete their post in shame

What he did is ask you, literally, what you had in mind for the 99.99% of people that don’t win the tech innovation lottery

What the fuck is wrong with email now ?

It’s one of the only things that hasn’t been ruined those past few internet decades, only slightly improved, and is still decentralized and can still allow you to self host, don’t you touch it

A homeless person is without the mental structure to build something lasting, or else they would not be homeless or would identify differently, e.g. as a traveler.

You’re a truly disgusting ghoul