limonfiesta

Just because I’m pointing out just some of the deeply unjust and inherent flaws in your proposal, doesn’t mean it’s spin.

You realize that you’re not making these arguments on a libertarian forum, right?

The vast majority of us here are left wing and not inherently opposed to the concept of government or regulation, yet the vast majority of us here seem very much opposed to your ideas.

Just some food for thought.

Yes, all adults.

Unless you’re proposing that these people on your offender lists are only allowed to date other offenders.

You are saying that person B is not allowed to date person A, even if both adults consent to enter a relationship, because one of those parties can be sent to jail for the crime of entering into a private consensual adult relationship.

Ergo, you have removed the ability of both parties to have a mutually consensual relationship of their choosing.

You haven’t even left the confines of Lemmy, and you’re already running headfirst into unintended consequences.

Every one of your replies simply adds rhetorical flair to my assertion that you are proposing the government should have regulatory power over the rights of adults to engage in private consensual relationships, which would be handled by the criminal legal system.

The state has different obligations to protect children than they do adults. Which is why we have things like drinking age laws and legal concepts such as in loco parentis.

You are completely removing the agency of adults to make their own choices, and instead, inserting the government into those relationships, under the penalty of incarceration and government sanctioned violence, for the crime of having an unauthorized interpersonal consensual relationship between two adults.

And that’s only taking your proposal at face value and ignoring the plethora of unintended consequences, such as perverse political incentives and privatization.

they should be disallowed from participating in a close, intimate relationship

The legal mechanisms required to enforce that would be some form of government permission and approval structure, such as licensing.

No amount of rhetorical flourish can get away from what they are essentially presenting, which is requiring government permission for interpersonal relationships.

How would the government track an individuals approval for personal private relationships?

How would the government enforce penalties on private citizens who engaged in an unauthorized private relationships?

And then we get to some fun questions, like what happens if the government privatizes the relationship approval system that OP is proposing?

Plenty of people that commit certain crimes have conditions for re-entering society in whole and I don’t think what I’m suggesting is unreasonable.

You are suggesting government issued licenses/permission for private people to engage in private relationships.

You could have just said yes.

Are you proposing that people should have to obtain a government-issued licenses for private interpersonal relationships?

deleted by creator

Virtual Box is a Type 2 hypervisor, which means it’s running on top of the OS, and not directly on the hardware.

KVM is a Type 1, which runs directly on the hardware itself.

There are pros and cons to each, and VBOX is a great piece of software, but it is more resource intensive than other options available.

There’s plenty of good reasons to keep a windows device updated and available for use.

Honestly, I prefer that to spinning up a windows VM, especially if your needs include Windows software that interfaces directly with external hardware.

I realize that’s not an option for everyone, but for those who have an extra device available, or can afford a used laptop to keep in a closet, it’s well worth it IMO.

Dafuq?

Unless it’s for SMTP only, it’s probably a back end sever to some other front facing box, or service, that has IP addresses whitelisted for email.

I’m pretty sure I read one of his comments elsewhere talking about tunneling everything over SSH, so I assume that’s what he meant, but I could be mistaken.

Regardless, using an EOL distro as an internet facing SSH server that’s 8 years behind on SSH updates, is probably a bad idea.

We’re not talking about some punch card COBOL machine he jimmy rigged with network access, it’s an old Debian Linux box with SSH enabled.

It’s not like Metasploit would have a tough time finding unpatched vulnerabilities for it…

I’m assuming they meant that they were company phones, and that additionally they were required for any work related MFA requirements.

If that’s the case, it would be YubiKey in addition to, not instead of.

As for the time tracking software, those are often part of a much larger accounting, payroll, and/or HR software suite. Having his team spin up Windows vms, or even have separate older windows boxes somewhere, probably makes more financial sense than not. At least, until they can switch to a more modern suite that has a web portal.

B2B cold lead generation is illegal in Germany?

Might be workable if you settle on combining only 2 to 3 keys (small, medium, large) per hex.

Or, learn metallurgy and material science to find some new polymer or alloy that would be strong enough.

But honestly, it sounds like a really expensive endeavor that even if you made it work, isn’t practical enough to justify the cost.

Maybe something like the universal socket wrench style could influence a design that’s workable as a multi-hex, and be made cheaply enough.

Did you have healthcare before Russia invaded Ukraine

Yes, I did until they sent me a letter informing me that they were booting me off my Medicare for All plan and converting it into artillery shells for the Kherson offensive.

You just answered your own question. How many users click approve without thinking? How many install Xposed modules that intentionally, or unintentionally, create security issues?

I didn’t say rooting will break your security, just that it can. Rooting exponentially increasing the attack surface, which for some users isn’t a concern, but for your average user, it probably should be.

In this case, this person wanted to increase his privacy, which is why I recommended what I did.

Also, FWIW, there’s a reason why GrapheneOS and DivestOS specifically design their ROMS to NOT be rooted and to RELOCK the bootloader.

Rooting can harm the security of your device, significantly.

I understand you’re wanting to root for privacy reasons, and I’m not saying you should never root, just understand the risks.

Instead, I’d suggest keeping your Pixel and installing GrapheneOS.

Or, find another phone that is supported by DivestOS.

Both of those ROMs are privacy and security hardened and relock your bootloader for a secure boot.