Speedrunning the decline and fall of the Roman empire.

Though today we get:

Find out what these big four names were convicted of!

It’s correct, as much as any English is correct, but not typically spoken naturally like that.

The press (newspapers) has an idiosyncratic grammar, probably born of maximising space in a newspaper column. Headlines are often grammatical nightmares, body copy less so.

One could think of it as a form of semantic compression.

300 big boys!

The loot!

The loot!

The loot is on fire!

Needs more plants.

I trialled both a while ago, chose ummich asits face recognition was superior.

There were other reasons, but I’ve forgotten them.

You’re looking for rationality when no such thing is present.

I was just reading my grandmother’s erotic journal…

WTF TNG.

CEO material.

Pickling the onion

I bought a refurbished SFF PC and put a PCIe NIC in it. Installed opnSense.

Cheap as chips. Supremely powerful.

The Adama Manoeuvre.

OMG.

Yeah. I was going to expand on that in the comment and decided not to for brevity.

It was only in the final two episodes that the timeline is established and it was the final two episodes that annoyed a lot of fans.

I still consider the 2004 series the actual serious BSG. I was around for the original and it was typical 80s schlock, though I loved it as a preteen.

Likewise. I watched the original as a child and loved it. The 2004 series is some of off the finest TV ever made.

The reboot of BSG places it 150,000 years before our present.

This made a lot of people very angry. I, for one, liked it. YMMV.

Another bullshit passive-voice headline. Written implying the fault was not with the LAPD.

“LAPD officers destroy MRI machine in bungled pot raid”

I have X years experience with {keyword salad}.

Can you confirm {details already in the opening post}?

I still double-check my CIDR’s/netmasks and expected ranges with a tool (some online one or other). Easier to avoid silly mistakes or typo’s

TL;DR: it depends entirely on the DHCP server software.

Generally the safe/reliable policy is to assign a smaller DHCP range (or ranges) and allocate static assignments outside of the DHCP range(s).

Assume your network is 192.168.1.0/24.

Specify 192.168.1.128/25 for DHCP, which means all DHCP addresses will be above 192.168.1.128.

This leaves you everything below 192.168.1.127 for static assignments.

But then they can’t force you to watch claim that you watched the ad at the start of the video for that sweet advertiser revenue.