JFowler369

As an over-explainer I never got the mindset of being mad at more information. Regardless of whether I know something or not I would never get upset that someone shared knowledge with me. The more information the better. If I already knew, what's the big deal? If I didn't, great learned something new. If I disagree, I'll say why and try to understand their point of view and maybe end up with a better understanding based on their knowledge/perspective.

Genuinely curious why it is so upsetting? Why would we not want to encourage knowledge sharing? Seems like the person thinks you are calling them dumb by telling them things, but how are you supposed to know what other people know? Personally I think it says more about the person getting mad than the person sharing information, but I know I'm in the minority for that.

Larian made comments after Hasbro laid off a bunch of Wizard staff that pretty much everyone they worked with had been fired. Probably doesn't sit too well seeing the people that you worked together for years with to make a huge success were fired as soon as the job was done. All to prop up other sides of Hasbro that aren't profitable.

Larian is independent for a reason. It allows them to actually be able to walk away from a lucrative deal when they don't agree with the practices of their partner. Why should they make more money and content for a company shitting on the people that made them what they are. BG3 is great because of Larian not Hasbro or DnD. Whatever they make next will be successful either way so why not make something they own.

RAID is redundancy. It saves your data if a or two drive fail, but does not help you if the entire RAID system dies (power surge, fire, water damage). Generally if it is on the same system it is not a backup.

I'd love to get mine all on SSDs but 80tb of SSDs gets pretty expensive

They didn't ignore they backlash, they promised to "always" have split screen going forward.. Only to not even make that promise last a single game. Infinite didn't even have network coop at launch. At this point no one should trust anything 343 says. Their track record speaks for itself.

Yeah that was my thought when I read this article. I used the ladder once, thought never again, and just started jumping up. Only issue is a double ladder but those are better avoided anyway.

Man, Infinite's campaign was such a disappointment. Halo to me was always about the big set pieces and new locations. Infinite had 2 locations essentially the whole game, not to mention the non story that happens mostly off screen. It's too bad because the grapple hook was one of the best additions to Halo since Bungie but you don't have anything fun to actually play with it.

Did you have a counter argument for calling bullshit? Because he probably had a point, there is definitely a niche for that level of security. It just generally involves state secrets.

Certain classifications of documents require access only from physically secure locations, called SCIFs, where all access is monitored and logged. Things like phones and cameras aren't allowed to prevent any data leakage.

That's not too say you can't be secure remotely, but really only against outsiders. Good luck stopping an employee from taking a picture with their personal phone of classified blueprints off their monitor at home. Good luck even knowing they did it before the data is gone.

When you factor in social engineering being the most successful type of "hacking", an office setting is undeniably more secure. However, most offices don't need that level of security, because data breaches aren't a matter of national security, so remote is an acceptable risk.

In that case, yeah give the guy a Mac lol. Just had to stand up for poor misunderstood IT guys, but sounds like he is in the wrong. Unfortunately there are quite a few of us that seem to just like telling users no.

Mount Vernon (George Washington's estate) does a pretty good job of exploring that mind set without ever justifying slavery or down playing the horrific nature of it. American society was built on slavery, so the people born at the top and benefiting from it would have no reason to question, is this right, because if it's not then all the people who raised me were evil and that can't be true.

There is a lot of similarities between the slave owner class of the civil war and the "capitalist elite" of today. "Why ban slavery if I'm not enslaved and could maybe one day own a slave" is about like "why tax billionaires if I don't need the government and I might one day be a billionaire?".

"Yeah we freed them, but we were allowed to restructure our laws to keep them subjugated and continued to treat them as subhuman. So was it really worth it?".

Reconstruction should have, at a minimum, barred any supporter of the Confederacy from holding office again, or, even better, had the leaders hanged as traitors. Instead we let them continue just with "banned" slavery (except for as punishment for a crime).

We then allowed slave owners to write the laws to integrate formerly enslaved people into their society, and, surprise surprise, they structured the laws to benefit themselves and keep the formerly enslaved as second class. So instead of "was ending slavery worth it?". It should be asking "was keeping slavers alive worth it?" as we are still dealing with the consequences of that today.