Yep, This is taken straight from Facebooks advertisements circa 2018, maybe still today.
RecallMadness
joined 1 year ago
??? There’s no innuendo here.
Super Thunder Blade did this, same era too.
Put each character in a spans with random classes, intersperse other random characters all over the place also with random classes, then make the unwanted characters hidden.
Bonus points if you use css to shuffle the order of letters too.
Accessibility? Pffffft.
Welcome to NZ where at least 40% of our advertising is puns and innuendo.
It increases to 70% when talking about tradespeople.
Could a hypothetical attacker not just get you to visit a webpage, or an image embedded in another, or even a speculatively loaded URL by your browser. Then from the v6 address of the connection, directly attack that address hoping for a misconfiguration of your router (which is probable, as most of them are in the dumbest ways)
Vs v4, where the attacker just sees either your routers IP address (and then has to hope the router has a vulnerability or a port forward) or increasingly gets the IP address of the CGNAT block which might have another 1000 routers behind it.
Unless you’re aggressively rotating through your v6 address space, you’ve now given advertisers and data brokers a pretty accurate unique identifier of you. A much more prevalent “attack” vector.
I would like TVs to offer a custom scale. Where the minimum and maximum values are reasonable, but the numbers are proportionate.
Legally mandated support for:
- Odds only
- evens only
- primes only
- Gould’s sequence (too quiet? You’ll double the volume at some point)
- Bernoulli Numbers (too noisy outside, the TV will make it quiet)
1,2,3,5,7,11,13,17,19 are the only volumes.
I was maybe a little inebriated, and he was very rude.
He had to wait for the next train, and I had a sore jaw for a week. Mild inconveniences al round. I think everyone got what they deserved.
It’s a poorly worded article that (intentionally or not) ends up sowing resentment between the have nots, and have nots with a family home. (As opposed the haves, with a rental portfolio, holiday home overseas, trust funds, etc)
Makes the boogeyman the people that are seen, the peers in (relative) poverty. While the actual boogeyman can hide away out of sight. Be it overseas land barons, corporate landlords, or just straight up wealthy living in their large secluded properties.
Threw a man’s belongings off a train because he was listening to music without headphones.
Worth it.
Because you’re only ‘exposing’ the port on the peer to peer network.
You “publish” a port to holesail, then clients have to create a local proxy via holesail before they can access it.
I agree, It’s a dumb pointless claim. But I don’t think it’s misleading.
It looks like holesail is just tailscale, but on a much smaller scale. It’s not networks, it’s just ports.