Maybe they meant of the box. You have to add additional repos to get non-free drivers installed on Debian or install them manually.
Maybe they meant of the box. You have to add additional repos to get non-free drivers installed on Debian or install them manually.
I’ve been using Linux as my main driver for a couple of years now but I didn’t know the list of reserved file name characters is so short.
I didn’t believe ‘*’ is allowed. That alone is so error-prone, it’s insane. Backslash is allowed too - how do you escape that? Sometimes I think they giggled while writing the specs.
Could be a microphone…
At that time my bank allowed up to 6 digits as a password. I kid you not, like a card PIN but for online banking login. I believe the whole banking security relies on their backoffices still running on paper.
I swear it’s always Adblock Plus in memes about ad-blocking. Who makes these memes?
Different mindset. A user doesn’t want to find bugs but get shit done.
And we absolutely wanted to shoot the tester who gave us this use case.
Why? Because he tested well and broke the software? A user changing their mind during a guided activity absolutely is a valid use case.
Yes, but pirated software is also an incredibly simple attack vector.
Well, it’s a life, I guess…
It’s actually quite similar. Non-fungible since only OP has the private key but easy to steal by just downloading the image (and cropping the key if you want).
It’ll drop the price, so there’s that at least.
I’ll miss traffic predictions and live traffic rerouting
That’s the only feature I’m using it for. The car’s built-in navigation is sufficient for “dumb” routing.
I’d really hate if they fuck up Maps since there are no alternatives on the same level but since it’s the last of their services I depend on, I could degoogle for good.
I don’t want to hear perfectionist fallacy arguments
You mean like the ones you gave if there was a 100% renewable power grid and transportation was 100% electrical glass would be carbon neutral?
Well, both aren’t and we are a long way from either, so that argument stands. You may care about your nutsack, as do I about my own, but climate change is the more critical problem.
I hardly want to reply for your aggressiveness. I don’t see how that’s been called for.
But yes, I was being serious because you explicitly excluded all bottles by “bottled beverages”. So I thought, water can be replaced by tap water (I do that personally because I don’t want carry crates that are unnecessary) but what about beer, for example? I could order kegs (no sarcasm, they start at 5 liters) but can hardly take them with me.
So, by “bottled beverages” you don’t count “returnable bottles”. Apart from that differentiation not being obvious, it didn’t occur to me because in my country almost all sold bottles are returnable, even single-use ones.
Hope that clarifies my question. Maybe next time don’t immediately jump to conclusions and make assumptions about other people’s lifestyle.
Yes (I actually live in Europe), but it cannot be reused indefinitely and needs to be recycled after about 50 uses (that’s why I mentioned the whole life cycle of a bottle). Also, glass breaks.
stopped buying bottled beverages
What’s the alternative in your opinion? I don’t think barrels and glasses are viable in every case. Serious question.
This generalization is a problem. Assessing the whole life cycle, the carbon footprint of glass bottles is problematic and plastics is a viable alternative.
You have to consider the significantly higher weight of glass increasing carbon emissions from transportation.
While plastics bottles can only be reused about half as often as glass bottles, their production is far more energy-efficient (glass production is done at temps of 1400-1600 °C or 2500-3000 °F while plastics use temperatures from 160-300 °C or 320-600 °F) which also reduces carbon footprint in basically every country.
Of course recycling has to be taken seriously and properly organized to prevent plastics just ending up in nature. But we have to balance the micro-plastics problem against climate change. We need to solve both.
It doesn’t work that way.
The bottle itself is usually made of PET which is very recyclable. The cap is made of polypropylene for its strength to prevent the bottle from leaking.
You cannot recycle PET and PP together - you need pure resin for production. So this captive closure actually hinders recycling.
Personally, I’ve never seen many caps lying around without their bottle and think the EU solved a non-existent issue.
Thanks, that’s good to know. I wasn’t up-to-date since I currently don’t run a Debian machine.