If you’re having issues with the core matrix integration, please file a bug! You never know who else might be having the same issue.
I sometimes admin. But usually not.
If you’re having issues with the core matrix integration, please file a bug! You never know who else might be having the same issue.
If you need to include a file from an external folder in your notifications, you will have to list the source folder as allowed.
https://www.home-assistant.io/integrations/matrix/
This applies to you.
Great answer, and to add to this:
There’s a world of difference between someone who’s single, not satisfied with it, and actively desiring/seeking a relationship (single and looking) and someone who actively self-identifies as inherently doomed to be single due to the actions/perceptions of others (incel).
People in the former category NEVER call themselves incels.
Yep, the other workaround that’s elsewhere in this thread is to set up an entry with a different authoritative DNS in the hosts file, allowing a single machine to resolve the old domain manually.
This could be part of a greater effort, basically asking other instances to help the users evacuate the instance and transfer their accounts, before running tootctl self-destruct
OP, this title is stupidly misleading and incorrect, you should change it immediately.
The Taliban seized the DOMAIN, aka the ownership of the queer.af
name that people could type into their browsers, and their system would resolve into an IP address.
As the Taliban control Af
ghanistan, (see where the domain comes from), this was inevitable and the instance owners were already planning to retire the instance as they didn’t want to give money to the Taliban to keep it up.
The INSTANCE, aka the physical server, was not in Afghanistan, and still has its IP address(es), and so has had absolutely nothing happen to it.
It can also be used to make methamphetamine.
I’d honestly prefer raw parroting in most cases, even if it’s “obviously” wrong. I don’t want people selectively interpreting the facts as have been conveyed to them, unless they’re prepared to do a proper peer review.
Though btw, I also think it’s fascinating the difference if you look up Pyhäsalmi Mine gravitricity "2 MW"
vs Pyhäsalmi Mine gravitricity "2MW"
You’ll get different articles entirely
I googled Pyhäsalmi Mine gravitricity "2 MW"
and EVERY article covering this has also cited 2 MW.
Now, under Occam’s Razor, what’s more likely:
I don’t know which one it is. But I’d generally lean against 1.
Damn, Steamboat Willie going into public domain really has Disney tightening the purse strings /s
It’s a pure math equation. You know you’ll have more money at the end of the day if you keep as much as you can in a HYSA.
So do the math on exactly how much more.
Is that amount worth your peace of mind over that long a time period? Is your partner someone you want to spend that much money on right now?
These are simple questions to ask: maybe harder to answer. But once you have them, just make a choice and be happy with it.
All but confirms
So not confirmed
An API token is more secure than a password by virtue of it not needing to be typed in by a human. Phishing, writing down passwords, and the fact that API tokens can have restricted scopes all make them more secure.
Expiration on its own doesn’t make it more secure, but it can if it’s in the context of loading the token onto a system that you might lose track of/not have access to in the future.
Individual API tokens can also be revoked without revoking all of them, unlike a password where changing it means you have to re-login everywhere.
And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Lmk if you have questions, though.
Right? Like fuck Google and all, but can you imagine how many absurdities would have to have happened in order for it to be blocked?
Others beat me to the punch on saying this is just worse WebAuthN, but there are some specific flaws that boil down to saying that this whole thing is, at best, totally inconsiderate of real attack vectors such as phishing
Online Login: On supported platforms, log in with your ‘Sign’ rather than your email address. The service checks for a corresponding email in their database that produces the same hash with the chosen algorithm/options. Services can eventually replace emails with ‘Signs’ for regular users.
Enhanced Privacy: Limits the need to share email addresses, reducing spam and data breach risks.
Huh? What does this even mean? How can you avoid sharing your email and replace it with a sign, if they need to check it against their database of… Emails?
Real-Life Usage: In physical stores, use your QR-art ‘Sign’ when asked if you have an account/booked at table.
Ah excellent. Someone can just look at a security camera or just snap a photo over your shoulder and steal your sign then. Because your proposal sure doesn’t note any way that these are 1-time use only. And if they were, this sounds like an awfully inconvenient way of receiving a temporary number (which sites usually only ever do as a cheap/bad 2FA method/password resets)
Email Verification: Receive a unique link via email, confirming your email’s validity.
Oh boy, better make sure to not get phished! Or that the link is 1 time use! Or that you aren’t being victimized by a MITM attack and getting it intercepted immediately!
Hey, I maintain a highly popular (if niche) FOSS library. Where the fuck is my big tech paycheck where they bribe me into integrating with their product?
/s Silly take IMO, relies on cherry-picking popular FOSS projects where you can see “the influence” of big tech, AND then No True Scotsman your way into saying that they’re not allowed to participate in the development/influence of FOSS because… checks notes they’re the ones funding the project/putting money in front of otherwise unpaid volunteers?
If you end up coming up with a better scheme for things that has the actual practical effect of compensating devs appropriately (yes, that means at current market rates or better) for their work, then please let us know so we can switch to doing that immediately. I will literally do anything you suggest if it would achieve that end.
No, it absolutely wasn’t, as can testify anyone who actually had to work with it: https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/the-death-of-adobes-flash-is-lingering-not-sudden/
There are lots of good reasons to get rid of Flash. Browser makers say it’s a top sore spot for security, performance and shorter battery life.
https://tedium.co/2021/01/01/adobe-flash-demise-history/
Usability means a few things in this context—simplicity, ease of use, convention, and accessibility. Flash was none of those things. It took the blank-canvas approach to creativity—which was great for the artists and illustrators that originally made up its target audience, but morphed into numerous other forms that it wasn’t necessarily designed for. It fell into overuse and quickly became abused by others.
I do think it sped up the demise of Flash on the web considerably.
That’s unironically an innovation right there
The sad reality is that most of the people reading your comment and mine are naturally going to be privileged enough to have literacy education, internet access, and the spare time to browse the internet.
Too many leftists think locally and not globally; underprivileged individuals in other countries half a world away are easy for them to disqualify as an “out of context problem”, when we should all be in this together: global intersectionality.