No. If it’s everyone, then it’s everyone and at worst it’s not the most efficient way to communicate.

I would say, if you single out a group of people based on physical characteristics, then it gets weird.

But if it’s “The internet won’t start” vs “Every packet on port 433 is dropped even though no firewall rule is set”, then I think it’s reasonable to make some asumptions and adjust communication accordingly.

I work in IT and sometimes I have to explain something to a user who is somewhat tech-illiterate. Even developers may have significant blind spots when it comes to their OS or networking, for example.

So, if I notice it, I’ll change some terminology and I may explain instructions differently or use metaphors so every user understands what I’m saying.

And most coworkers do the same thing.

Here’s why I bring this up: For whatever reason, some colleagues give female coworkers the same treatment.

And that’s weird.

If someone is constantly treated like this, they should be allowed to rant about it on their blog. I’m fine with snark if it geht’s a point across.

Only data that is not stored cannot fall victim to attackers. It does not matter whether it is a ‘nigerian prince’, Microsoft or some agency. Even if you completly trust whatever entity with your data right now, they may become problematic in the future.

This is why a low profile is a crucial component of OPsec.

Recall is objectively stupid, even if Microsoft only had their users best interest in mind. And they don’t.

Hello, I’m your boss. Saw you on your phone during your break in the video feed.

You’ve been asking for a raise for years. Unfortunately, you’re a really good performer, always on time, good worker, and I’ve never heard anything negative that I could base my decision to deny your raise on. So I watched the video feed to find the most minuscule thing that I can pinpoint as a “problem”. I was about to tell you that drinking water on the job significantly decreases your performance, but that post you made on your break is now going to be my reason. Screw you. I love money!

Sincerely, your favorite boss

Who’s “they”?

If it’s Urologists, like, those are the experts. If it’s someone on Twitter, they don’t matter. If it’s women as a whole… oh, boy. Dude. If it’s “the jews”, OH. BOY. DUDE. HOW EVEN?

Me: Can I have (small template parser)?

Stackoverflow: No, we have (small template parser) at home.

Small template parser at home: Full-stack web framework

I’d love to say something sensible, understandable and concise.

But this post is like someone shouting “WHY DID MATHEMATICIANS MAKE THE √ SYMBOL TICK SHAPED?!”, convinced they’ve found a way to prove that 2+2 is not 4.

There is so much to unpack there. Properly responding to every explicit and implicit grain is like reasoning against a beach.

The innovation of DRM and Intels SGX extention is the reason no current-gen PC can play 4K Blurays in 4K.

I’ve been using Linux for more than a decade now as my daily driver.

Count me as ‘basic’ and ‘just starting’, because I quite like the colorful, clicky and nicely animated version, where I don’t have to remember anything and that works just as well.

And now out of my way, while I happily point, click and scroll to adjust my displays brightness, which is entirely possible through the terminal, but I’m not ridiculous or insecure enough for that.

deleted by creator

Fair point, will do… at some point in the future.

Edit #1: You people are expecting way too much reasonability from someone using emojis to login.

Edit #2: Urgh! FINE. Have your sensible title that actually means something and betters everyones experience. angrily sips water >:(

We are sorry, your request could not be processed. 😊

As you know, at Corp.inc we believe that the most important thing there is, is human connection. ❤️ For this reason, every complaint must contain at least 2 happy emojis or 1 heart.

Please resubmit your concern accordingly. 😉

with love, Corp.inc - Issue Management

I don’t think anyone takes this seriously. It’s just fun to come up with the worst password policies.

Just imagine the error: “Sorry, your password could not be set. If you decide to include more than one animal, make sure they get along or include a zookeeper as well.”

Fucking brilliant.

The Interrogator: “You think you’re so funny… WHAT. IS. THE. PASSWORD!!!”

A guy, tied to a chair, bloodied and crying: “Amogus, it’s a drawing of the Amogus guy.”

The interrogator prepares another round of fists

deleted by creator

Edit #2: ICE is a type of train in germany. I mistook “ICE cars” as meaning trains and was wondering how flying is supposed to be more efficient than trains. Hence my confusion.

OG comment (invalid, see Edit #2): Where are these numbers coming from?

I cannot find any source for the 3-4l/passenger/km claim. I cannot find any source for the claim that planes are more efficient. Nothing comes even near this claim.

https://ourworldindata.org/travel-carbon-footprint

https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/rail-and-waterborne-transport

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49349566

Can you please provide a source?

Edit #1: I just want to add that my old combustion car (VW Up! / Seat Mii / Skoda Citigo) burned around 4.2l/100km. So I according to you, if I had another person with me, I’d beat both planes and trains with what stands uncontested as the most inefficient form of transport?

Stallman is like the friend you’ll never introduce to your family.