r00ty

Oh, this might be some instagram/threads thing then, I know they share an account. I don't use either of those services.

I know on Facebook there's these ads for threads and it's putting random thread "stories" (I don't know what they're called) up on the timeline. So I thought they were doing a similar thing between all three services and not honouring the privacy setting.

Still, just my personal opinion. If there's automatic crossposting, the default really should be to use the more restrictive privacy setting for each service.

No, it's obviously the trans led far left extremists!

Well, I still have a Facebook account for the few people that are only on there. I am getting ads showing Threads posts, and if you click it, it takes you to threads and wants you to make an account.

So I'm assuming what is happening is that they're taking posts from one service and showing them on their other services with click through to make accounts on those services. I guess they're not honouring the privacy setting on the source service. Which if that is the case, is just terrible.

I was about to say, it's normal for meta. But then I read they made private posts public on the other platform.

No, just no. No excuse for that at all.

My comment about it was it looked like a grifter's site. But the gov domain gives it legitimacy.

Pardon incoming?

Propaganda, for want of a better word, is good?

Yeah, no prices. I move on. Same with job ads, no salary no application. If I get an intrusive ad, I'm not buying that product, I'll deliberately seek out another brand in fact.

Is that a weird attitude to have? I thought it just made sense. We shouldn't be rewarding this BS.

With IPv6 for most use cases there's actually more security. With privacy extensions (pretty sure it's enabled on windows by default), when you make connections from your device, it uses a "private" IP. That is a randomly chosen address inside your network's prefix, that changes regularly.

These addresses don't accept incoming connections. You have a main address that doesn't really change that you accept connections on. Firewall that for ports you want to allow and then hackers need to port scan 2^64 or 2^80 address space to find your real IPs in your prefix. If they capture your IP from a connection to a web server etc, they won't have luck scanning you.

Again as per my post above, the biggest risk right now is bad default configurations on many home routers.

The "firewall" features are called connection tracking and, a firewall. With IPv6 I have my firewall setup very similar to NAT. Established and outgoing new connections are allowed (this is done using connection tracking). Incoming new connections are not allowed unless I open up a specific port.

Home firewalls SHOULD be setup the same for IPv6, a lot are not and IMO is the main problem right now.

I'm wondering what combination of features would use 25w on a phone. On flagship models the battery would last less than an hour at that consumption (and might even melt :P).

Your point still stands by the way, sensors take next to nothing in terms of power. I guess the point of the article is perhaps the processing of the signals is more efficient with this hybrid chip? Again though in real terms it's a nothing-burger in terms of power consumption.

I don't think there's ground even for an arrest in my (non professional mind you) opinion.

The act requires that a message be sent by any electronic means (including transmission) so, this meets that part. But the message must be indecent or grossly offensive. I would argue some pictures of a couple of buddies together shouldn't be grossly offensive.

Unless it's the police's view that it is offensive because of what Trump may, or may not have done with said now deceased criminal friend. In which case, they should be arresting someone else too.

Yes, it's a common police tactic to make arrests around the time of a visit like this. But, they really do need to be grounded in a realistic application of the law.