CheezyWeezle

lmao I’m guessing someone who doesn’t speak Spanish was told “we are out of ice, make a sign that says ‘No ice, no hielo, thanks, management’ and put it on the soda machine” and they just rolled with it phonetically

I never said this was a bad value, but I think we all know that these prices will not remain. They will increase because people will pay it once they are locked in. And if someone buys a used car, they have to pay that subscription to get these features, ensuring the manufacturer gets a slice from used sales. I can understand the cost, but it sets a dangerous precedent. It should be one time fee that grants the VIN access to the severs permanently. What would be really nice is if we had legislation that requires companies with a certain amount of revenue to maintain services for older products so they can’t just pull the plug later anyways.

I can understand some of these features requiring a $5/month subscription. Anything more than that is absolutely insane. With roadside assistance (depending on what that actually entails) I could see that sevice being bumped to $15-$20 a month,

Kind of. With hoisting, the compiler/interpreter will find variable declarations and execute them before executing the rest of the code. Hoisting leaves the variables as undefined until the code assigning the value to the variable is executed. Hoisting does not initialize the variables.

For example:

console.log(foo);
var foo;
//Expected output: console logs ‘null’

foo = ‘bar’;
console.log(foo);
var foo;
//Expected output: console logs ‘bar’

console.log(foo === undefined);
var foo;
//Expected output: console logs ‘true’

This means you can essentially write your code with variable declarations at the end, but it will still be executed as though the declarations were at the beginning. Your initializations and value assignments will still be executed as normal.

This is a feature that you should probably avoid because I honestly cannot think of any good use case for it that won’t end up causing confusion, but it is important to understand that every variable within your scope will be declared at the beginning of execution regardless of where it is written within your code.

? Does PayPal not allow this? PayPal has always called me “Praxis” lmao

No, I read the “win/win” as listing there only being two possible scenarios. They are saying you either win or you win. “Win/win” reads as “win or win”, so there is your “either… or”, but even then you don’t need to say specific words to be able to imply exclusivity.

Example:
“You must be joking, and if not, then you are a fool” Notice how in that sentence I did not use “either/or”, yet I still implied only two possibilities? Well, that sentence is homogenous to the sentence in OP’s post. I just used “if/then” instead of “either/or”.

The post suggests that there are only two options in the scenario: they are either secretly trans, or they are a bigot trying to belittle and insult trans women. They don’t leave any nuance for a different option. Dare I say that they have a rather binary way of thinking…

I never understood this obviously toxic take… saying that a cisgendered male crossdressing MUST be trans or trans-curious is exactly the same toxic energy as denying trans women’s existence.

Are you folks really gonna say that, for example, Tim Curry is a closet Trans Woman? Because that’s the kind of thing being implied by that. Just let people do what they are gonna do and be what they are gonna be, leave your assumptions and judgements out of it.

Sorry, but you made the claim so the burden of proof lies on you.

Sources?

I dont know why, but they completely changed the quote. https://x.com/satyanadella/status/1712816639404916947?s=20

Today is a great day for gamers everywhere. Together with Activision Blizzard, we will deliver on our vision to help people connect and play great games wherever, whenever, and however they want.

Most corporations are vastly reducing the cadence at which they replace hardware, given that new hardware lifecycles are much longer both in terms of reliability of the hardware and the performance compared to newer hardware.

The manifest (at least how I am using the term) is whatever metadata a file has, and the format and location of this metadata can differ between operating systems. Usually the manifest is generated by the operating system based off of header data from the file itself, and details about the file that the operating system can deduce, such as file size, origin, location, file type, etc. In Windows you can view this info by right clicking/opening the context menu on any file and selecting “Properties”, on macOS by opening the context menu and selecting “Get Info”, and on other OSes such as linux/freeBSD it will be something similar.

There are other usages for “manifest” depending on the context, for example a manifest.xml would be something a developer would include with an android app that has configuration settings and properties for the app.

Lmao your edit 2 is completely silly. SHA-256 is what would be used for checksum verification, and SHA-256 is pretty much collision resistant, and even then if two files computed the same hash they would have such different contents/properties that it would be obvious they are not the same file. MD5 and SHA-1 have been phased out for any serious usage for a while now.

Seriously tho, if you don’t know what you are talking about you should probably stop making a fool of yourself

It’s not built in afaik, but with Power Tools you can change the governor on the fly

I’m not sure that these things work the way you think they do… an antivirus wouldn’t just look for the name of an executable to be “legit.exe” but rather would look at what the program calls itself in it’s manifest, compute the hash for the executable binary file, and compare that hash against a database of known good hashes. If the contents of the executable compute a hash identical to the known good hash, then you know the contents of the executable are clean.

Yeah I’m guessing this is a false positive based on heuristic analysis, i.e. the TOR program has a lot of the same behaviors as malicious programs. Of course it is more accurate to say that the malicious programs are copying TOR behavior or just straight using TOR code, whatever the case may be.

My main issue is that it kind of shows a lack of due diligence. I assume the official TOR binaries are signed, so the official TOR binaries should be exempted from these heuristic positives. If the binaries are unsigned/have no valid certificates, then I can totally understand the false positive. At that point, the user should know they are installing software that cannot be automatically verified as being safe, and antivirus should never assume that something is safe otherwise. Like you said, for typical users this should be the expected behavior. Users can always undo Windows Defender actions and add exemptions.

if not, make it a farmers market and people can bring the food there.

The suggestion is that this is essentially what is happening. The exact real estate that these buildings will occupy are not likely to be greatly fertile lands. They might not be farmers markets, but it’s the same point you’re making here.

That’s only applicable when someone is altering a coin for fraudulent purposes, such as changing a coin to appear as a different denomination, or melting down coins for their metal. Those acts are considered to be defrauding the United States. Defacing currency in a way that is not altering the denomination or attempting to defraud in some way is not punishable.

You should go back to your quotes, its pretty obvious that we are discussing the idea of holding a belief while simultaneously categorizing that belief as impossible.