Jump to content

The Britain

Administrator
  • Content Count

    299
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. I'm going to preface this by saying I'm a systems administrator, so I'm not just speculating but I'm often wrong so please correct me if I get something incorrect here. - The source for XP has been available to partners and higher learning institutions for a long time. This is a leak of that code into the wide public. If there's any major vulnerability in XP, it's been known for quite some time. - XP is very old but can still be secured. There's allot to say for a strong end-point, modern browser, and appropriate firewall. Even a catastrophic zero-day attack can be mitigated 99% of the time by employing the right GPO policies and software solutions. The major issue with XP is the loss of support from many major software vendors. There are still quite a few however that haven't stopped support. - The constant beta that is Windows 10 is just as much of a security issue. Each update seems to introduce new vectors of attack we should have solved a decade ago. This article for example, isn't a one-off: https://www.businessinsider.com/nsa-flaw-microsoft-windows-update-software-2020-1 No operating system is impervious. Windows XP is older but I'm one of the rare techs that doesn't necessarily believe that updates, or the OS vendor for that matter, are the end-word for security. If they were, we wouldn't need anti-ransomware endpoints installed along-side Windows Defender (which is woefully inadequate). I'm not saying that XP doesn't have some glaring issues, but I am saying that this leak doesn't necessarily harerld the end of the world for XP users who are already - hopefully - adequate at dealing with the issues that XP presents.
  2. This function doesn't exist, if someone is harassing you by breaking our forum rules please let us know. If someone is PMing you after you've asked them to stop, also please let us know. Boards on here are public and as long as everyone is following the rules, they can post in any non-moderator-restricted topic.
  3. I wasn't directing that at you, just making a general statement. It seemed to be getting heated in here. Sorry if it came off that way.
  4. Please keep discourse civil. Attack the idea not the person.
  5. Howdy, I haven't heard back from you in a while. Please send me your username on GG and I will get that taken care of. I'm going to lock this thread as I believe it has run it's course. For anyone else that stumbles on this you can do the same.
  6. Nah man you're good and I get it, what's your username on there? You can PM it to me.
  7. Hi there, I don't frequently check the GG email, I will look into it. Do you have the same username as on this forum? I want to make something clear that seems to keep coming up. The right to be forgotten does not mean that your account must be deleted. First I'm in America and the servers hosting the website are in America. This means that it doesn't fall under GDPR. Under Google v. Garcia this extension of European rights into America was ruled unconstitutional. Second, GDPR does not include "Every single post since the beginning of time." GDPR means that I'm required to remove personally identifying information from the site. If, for example, you put photos of yourself up, your name, attached your birthday or address to your account, I must delete those. If I wanted to be pedantic, GDPR even gives me the right to request government ID and a long series of forms. In short, I delete this data (from GG that's the site I own) because I hate it when web-admins don't do it for me, and I try to be nice. Now regarding your post @kerdios, you're suggesting that this user takes legal action (against me) and suggesting that they might profit from it. Not only would it probably not pay out, you could be held responsible for their fees and damages. It sure looks like you're giving legal advice, even if you were licensed to do so which I'm suspecting you're not. Practicing law (advising of rights and penalties) without a license is illegal in the EU and America. In short, nose out.
  8. Ah good ol' Professor Elemental:
  9. Howdy, I will hand verify your account. When did you make it? There was a period I was just auto-approving accounts due to an email outage. I looked at your account, and your account was one we auto-approved. You're good to go.
  10. I can't get enough of this game.
  11. I have to disagree on this one, I thought it was shallow as hell. I was hoping for another Subnautica, not necessarily a build/survival game, but something with that depth of exploration and I was deeply disappointed.
  12. Might be a permissions error I will look into it. Thanks for letting us know.
  13. Yeah this is pretty accurate. I owned a Fiat 500e and it had a realistic range of 70-80 miles and it suited everything I needed for quite some time. The only reason I went back to an ICE vehicle is because I suddenly need to travel cross country one-way and the drop-fee for a rental and transport cost of my car is insane. Most people don't travel more than 40 miles in any day, and you can charge overnight on a standard 120v. Electric cars have around 70%-80% real efficiency of power usage and power plants are close to that while ICE vehicles are 50% tops. Many people make the argument that power plants are just moving the pollution somewhere else, but localized controlled pollution with heavy oversight is better than that pollution spread all-over. Not to mention there's a significant portion of the power-grid moving to renewable sources and nuclear power. From a personal standpoint, it was awesome owning an electric car. No emissions test, no oil, oil seals, transmission, transmission fluid, muffler system, ect, ect. Also since it's tech the value of those cars drops significantly in the first couple years. I picked up my Fiat 500e for $8000 with 10k miles on it, when just a few years ago it sold new for $36,000.
×
×
  • Create New...

This website uses cookies, as do most websites since the 90s. By using this site, you consent to cookies. We have to say this or we get in trouble. Learn more.