No, it’s better because Google can validate that it’s your information so they can use it to sell better targeted ads for more money. Or more pessimisticly sell that info to other companies/countries/scammers.

You take all the risk they take all the profit.

Swiftfin is the official Apple TV jellyfin app. Swiftfin is great on iOS, but hasn’t been updated on Apple TV for a while. It also lacks a lot of polish and features but it is being worked on. There should be an update soon.

I’ve been using infuse on Apple TV. Infuse isn’t open source and needs a subscription to watch most 4k hdr content. I think it’s worth it if Swiftfin gets an update soon.

Apple TV is definitely a better experience compared to Samsung and Android. Apps are nicer and there isn’t any ads, privacy controls and privacy statements are much better. Recommended content can also be disabled and only shows when your hovering over the relevant app.

They are responding to crimes being committed. This helps, and minimises the scope of the law. But, it doesn’t solve root cause.

You already need to have a reason to carry around a large blade. Anything over pocket/eating size. Someone with a kebab knife would have to be selling, gifting, repairing or travelling from or to a kebab place.

With these swords, collecting them is a good reason that would make it difficult to prosecute someone carrying it as a weapon. Banning them means the person carrying them is without doubt a criminal, because they are now illegal.

Most people committing knife crimes don’t have a profession (that they would tell police about) that requires large blades.

Microsoft can’t render text properly. Which is embarrassing for the company that makes the most popular document tools. Every app Microsoft makes that renders text well is running chromium at some level.

This is a a business operating to target children to deliver them content they know is inappropriate for them.

This behaviour is predatory. It shouldn’t be tolerated against children. The content is promoted for children, so it’s reasonable for a parent to assume the content is appropriate for them.

Maintaining and testing such an app has costs and risks. They may think it’s more secure that signal does this. It is also harder to attack all of signal.

They are also significantly resource constrained, everything they have goes towards defence. The effort building the app could be deployed on developing weapon systems they can’t buy.

Your right nations should have their own independent systems for secure communications for military, politicians and civil service.

1. Log into Microsoft Account
2. Go to Subscriptions Page
3. Choose 365 Subscription
4. Choose Cancel option

The player does have a large effect on both those things. A player that supports the codec will not need server hw accept and hdr conversion as it will direct stream. A big issues is these codecs can cost money. So if the player doesn’t come with it the player needs to pay for it, something plex may be doing for those that purchased their subscription.

Jellyseer is a jellyfin comparable alternative to ombi.

They sold a bad product that needs fixed, bad software shouldn’t get an exception. The warning icons were probably not compliant and should never have left the factory.

It’s worse than that, people will argue shipping good code is impossible. Good testing is hard, so it’s avoided for things like unit tests. Something that’s only equivalent to basic QA in manufacturing. Every software functions is a design change and the system needs to be fully validated and tested. That’s means driving the car, and not shipping the code and using the users cars to prove your design.

Broken software shouldn’t be accepted as much as it is. Especially in safety critical systems like cars, especially when they remove manual controls for things like steering, brakes, hand brakes and door handles. Fly/drive by wire is more dangerous when the software is unreliable. Mechanical linkages fail immediately or take a long time. Bad software fails in uncertain and potentially chaotic ways.

They couldn’t argue it was the Uncles responsibility to tell the child. The Uncle was told, and would also have been told to not tell the child. They set out to make the child believe they got the PlayStation because they wanted the reaction from the child.

A glass may have a spec that allows it to be filled to the brim. Doesn’t mean it’s a good idea, especially when you want to run up stairs with it.

Your going to spill water everywhere.

Because there are so many small parts to a processor you need 99.99+% at most stages to stand any chance of mass production. In this context 60-70% is seriously impressive. Millions of things have to be done right to get this type of yield.

In this situation a hub is still better. You can pack all the stuff away plugged into the hub for easier set up. If your plugging that all into your laptop, you’ll need to plug it all back in again when you move.

Not all patents are good. But a patent system is good. It could be better but the general concept is not flawed like the person I was responding to suggests.

The physical object isn’t what is patented in this case. It is the method to create the object that has a patent. One that can’t be reversed engineered as it isn’t part of the final product. You could only reverse engineer it if the process was not novel or not obvious to anyone knowledgeable in the field. If both of these conditions are true then the patent should not have been granted.

Patents are not inherently bad. This is a bad patent. Patent laws don’t have to be changed, because this patent shouldn’t have been granted. The issue is ineffective patent reviews, not patents. Getting rid of patents is not a good idea. If you think it is you probably don’t have a good enough grasp on what a patent is.

You can make something if you figure out how they did it because it was obvious. In this case the patent isn’t valid. If you have to develop a solution then the patent is probably valid. The patent is a reward for developing and sharing the solution publically.

If you still don’t grasp why patents are useful. It may be helpful to think of it like open source software. The patent is the code base that is freely accessible to everyone. This preserves the knowledge and lets others build on it. However, to incentivise people to make their code open source you provide protections that stop others from selling the same code you developed.

The incentive mechanism is why far more businesses produce patents than produce open source code.

If you remove patents businesses stop funding internal r and d overnight. It increase the risk and reduces the reward.

The patent system explicitly provides free access to knowledge. The patent is the knowledge that would be kept secret otherwise.

You would still have monopolies, except things like the ingredients to medicines would be unknown.

Patents do provide some value. If there were no patents than companies would make their technological development a a secret and not share the work with the world.

The patent systems exchanges knowledge and technology development for a temporary monopoly on the technology. It means a company can publish the ingredients to medicines, methods of manufacturing etc. if they didn’t have the patent system they would keep these secret and if a business folded this knowledge would be lost.