sadly, no. Anticheat Systems are designed to be paranoid as fuck. So even some readout of the hardware used that WINE handles a tad differently than Windows might trip it.

With you in a cart or something

How are you getting change?

What good is cash gonna do if the networked cash register doesn’t open anymore?

Oh, you actually believed that story? Whoops. Sorry! It was actually me who ate your Cheetos and downed your Vodka.

It doesn’t. It will require you to reboot for every god-damned line of code that has changed.

Na, nothing. Did an update today. Nothing bad happened at al, Because why would it?

Many of the machines in question will have safe mode walled off for security reasons anyway.

I really have a hard time deciding if that is the scandal the article makes it out to be (although there is some backpedaling going on). The crucial point is: 8% of the decisions turn out to be wrong or misjudged. The article seems to want us to think that the use of the algorithm is to blame. Yet, is it? Is there evidence that a human would have judged those cases differently? Is there evidence that the algorithm does a worse job than humans? If not, then the article devolves onto blatant fear mongering and the message turns from “algorithm is to blame for deaths” into “algorithm unable to predict the future in 100% of cases”, which of course it can’t…

Oh by Zeus,.may the gods have mercy for I have none.

I refuse to read anything after the headline to keep my blood below boiling point. Did I miss anything?

Thats the issue. Not only with poverty, but with overspending in general. Usually, money savin measures take time to become noticeable, since there is always some inertia in money flows (things that were already die when the saving measures were started, subscriptions, etc), so people who overspent will immediately see a drastic downfall of their living standards when they start saving, but still overshoot their budget for at least a few weeks usually, until all the overspending is paid off and the savings start to kick in. That’s a really dangerous phase because people often struggle to understand if they are doing it right or not.

So, we take the magazine diet of the month approach yet again? Instead of learning healthy spending habits, we barge in with the extremest measures we can find, inevitably fail and try the next needlessly extreme thing, repeating the cycle until we have lost so much self esteem in the process that we tell ourselves that we just aren’t made to save money?

Well then, this website over there told me that they have got shiny new shirts reduced from 1899,- to just 15 bucks, but only if I order 65 of them in the next.two minutes. Take my credit card! I’ll start no spending year right after! Pinky promise!

Imagine being presented with an aircraft. You bloody well know what it does and you get permission to disassemble the whole thing to your heart’s content. How big of a task do you think it’d still be to be able to work out how the winged metal tube works and why it does what it does when it does it?

Exactly.

Back in the day, when I installed my very first Linux OS, I had a wireless stick from Netgear. Wireless Drivers back then were abysmal, so I had to compile them from source (literally 15 mins after seeing a TTY for the first time). After I had found out how build-dependencies and such worked somehow and ./configure completed successfully for the first time, the script ended with the epic line:

configure done. Now type 'make' and pray

The enemy of my enemy, eh?

glibc 2.36 is all you’ll ever need, okay? Go away with those goddamn backports!

Especially with such careless failures. If some employee was tricked through a well-planned social engineering attack, or they used some mega obscure day0 vulnerability, I’d not be happy, but shit happens, I guess. But not sending my phone number when someone just posts some GET command to an API should be a no-brainer…

I don’t. So… uhm… you’re wrong I guess.

You know how Linux killed the chef?

With a fork bomb