Made in Abyss is pretty insane.

I noted an experimental rule in uBO to address delays, but have not tried it yet myself.

Under settings, Filter lists, Built-in, uBlock filters - Experimental

Code has a comment:

! fake buffering on the initial load

deleted by creator

Yes, but 20 billion parameters is too much for most GPUs, regardless of quantization. You would need at least 14GB, and even that’s unlikely without offloading major parts to the CPU and system RAM (which kills the token rate).

Your biggest issue is going to be dealing with multiple partitions, unless you can find another boot disk, because your disk is pretty full. I would strongly recommend getting a second disk, unless you are willing to delete a lot of (presumably) game executables.

It is also a good idea to have a relatively smaller Linux partition, and point your Steam library and other documents to a separate data partition. My 1TB nvme has 150MB EFI FAT32 partition, a 100GB ext4 root partition (Linux is installed here), and the remaining ~900GB as my ext4 data partition. This way, if you choose to install a different Linux, or blow away your root partition, you can relink your Steam/Music/Video Libraries and local AI models, and get up and running again very quickly.

Outside of the disk, my top recommendation is to archive your active steam games, so you can restore them into Linux without fully re-downloading later. Additionally, unless your games are in Steam Cloud, you will also have a bit of a time restoring save files to the new OS, as the file paths will be different than you are used to on Windows.

My second recommendation is to ensure secure boot is disabled in your BIOS; there are currently known issues with driver signing with the NVIDIA driver.

Finally, assuming you’re on a Ubuntu-based distro like Mint, ensure you install Steam from the .deb or apt package, not the flatpak. On Mint, “Install Steam” is available right in the start menu.

Somewhat the opposite, but can it run Crysis?

Sigh, clickbait at its finest, why else would we click

I would look at CISA’s Logging Made Easy project, which is based on Wazuh and Elastic with Kibana for visualization and dashboards.

https://github.com/cisagov/LME

Curious if this is so broadly true without bundled resources; obviously screens are higher DPI, so even buttons are now designed for at least 8K resolutions, even if most consumers are still on 1080p.

Orders of magnitude beyond 640x480 or pre Windows 3.1 resolutions.

Explain your thought process here, how did you arrive at the larger bottle being 90% more detergent? It’s EXPLICITLY clear that the concentration is higher in the smaller bottle.

You could complain about the form factor or lack of precision in dosing loads using the higher concentration, but “detergent” is mostly water, which they clearly said they reduced by 75% (same solute, with less water/solvent = higher concentration).

Quick search and going by what it says on the label, the cost per load has not significantly changed, a little more than half a penny’s difference:

Ultra Concentrated (left) $15/60 loads = $0.25/load https://mrsmeyers.com/collections/laundry/products/ultra-concentrated-laundry-detergent-rain-water?variant=50673207640338

Standard (right) $18/74 loads = $0.2432/load https://mrsmeyers.com/collections/laundry/products/ultra-concentrated-laundry-detergent-rain-water?variant=50673207640338

You definitely should bump it up the list, especially if you can handle ray tracing, though the raster lighting is also good.

BE WARNED. These extensions are a prime target for purchase and/or hijacking by malicious threat actors, who then use them to gain persistence on your browsers and steal data. There is no reason to increase your browser attack surface for this feature when better alternatives have been posted in this thread.

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/chrome-extensions-with-14-million-installs-steal-browsing-data/

https://arstechnica.com/security/2025/01/dozens-of-backdoored-chrome-extensions-discovered-on-2-6-million-devices/

There are dozens of these articles dating back the last five years or so.

Shouldn’t be this hard to find out the attack vector.

Buried deep, deep in their writeup:

RocketMQ servers

• CVE-2021-4043 (Polkit)
• CVE-2023-33246

I’m sure if you’re running other insecure, public facing web servers with bad configs, the actor could exploit that too, but they didn’t provide any evidence of this happening in the wild (no threat group TTPs for initial access), so pure FUD to try to sell their security product.

Unfortunately, Ars mostly just restated verbatim what was provided by the security vendor Aqua Nautilus.

Only the cyber truck. Model S and 3 refreshes are still on the legacy platform, with a lithium ion 12V.

This server, maintained by Internet carrier Cogent Communications

Found the problem!

So the article repeats, several times, “waymo relies on remote operators”. I don’t think the author knows what “self-driving” means.

Possible? Yes. Likely? Not at all.

To perform a zero knowledge proof, you’d have to have structured data to support the claim, which most whistleblowers would not have. If a whistleblower already had the hard evidence in hand, e.g., serial numbers and timestamps, they could have just provided those anonymously, and someone could follow up. The problem is, you can’t always get a copy of the hard evidence without revealing your intent to the employer, or at least, other employees.

Presumably most whistleblowers are making unsubstantiated claims that something happened, or maybe with light evidence. Based on who they are, a journalist or investigator may then elect to follow up and dig up the hard evidence to support the claim. This requires revealing your name and position/relationship to at least one person. Rarely, they would be willing to put themselves out there to provide an affidavit under oath, which itself is not enough to pursue criminal charges (though it could help build a case around intent or willful neglect, or help support a warrant or discovery).

It’s illegal, but not unheard of, to try to force journalists to reveal their sources, but the same protections are not universally in place if you reported a finding to a company’s internal affairs, for example. But unlike attorney-client privilege, or shield law protections, the risk in signing an affidavit is, as we’ve seen in recent US trials, that records will not stay sealed, and your name will be revealed to the defense and/or public.

As far as people I’d trust to not just make shit up, I’d say Librarian, aka, professional fucking researcher is high on the list.

For encryption, the client and server need to share their private keys.

This is incorrect, for asymmetric (public-private) encryption. You never, ever share the private key, hence the name.

The private key is only used on your system for local decryption (someone sent a message encrypted with your public key) or for digital signature (you sign a document with your private key, which can be validated by anyone with your public key).

For the server, they are signing their handshake request with a certificate issued by a known certificate authority (aka, CA, a trusted third party). This prevents a man-in-the-middle attack, as long as you trust the CA.

The current gap is in inconsistent implementation of Organization Validation/Extended Validation (OV/EV), where an issuer will first validate that domains are legitimate for a registered business. This is to help prevent phishing domains, who will be operating with TLS, but on a near-name match domain (www.app1e.com or www.apple.zip instead of www.apple.com). Even this isn’t perfect, as business names are typically only unique within the country/province/state that issues the business license, or needed to be enforced by trademark, so at the end of the day, you still need to put some trust in the CA.

deleted by creator