2020 Apple MacBook pro has an i9-9880HK, more than enough, but lacks TPM2.0. The issue is this is just a waste of resources and money for a large number of people and the TPM2.0 requirement is silly.
Microsoft with the push to require TPM 2.0, that isn't really required, is responsible for huge amounts of new e-waste. Any green initiative they claim is out the door.
Im not going to do the support for my kids not using windows along with the schools using O365 and such. So found a refurb business laptop for them on the one without TPM2. Popped linux on the old one and it went from slow to fast for OS related things and not a terrible machine but snappy. Like, it's a 10yr old i5 but that was enough for sims4, office, and minecraft. It's crazy how much compute performance Windows is taking from its users.
to be fair the iot edition of windows ten is also blazingly fast to the point where >10yo thinkpads are perfectly fine for everything outside of gaming ... so id blame microsoft for adding layers upon layers of shit to the os , instead of blaming the os itself
The idea that the people who don't go to the polls and cast ballots don't vote is not true. They have chosed to have what the others choose. That is a choice and they made it, just like those that cast a preference via ballot.
Since these companies have positioned themselves and infrastructure and are de facto utilities, we need to regulate them as such. If they are going to cancel an account there needs to be a transparent and open process that is fair, not autonomous fraud protection without recourse, just a goodbye. This is them pushing their costs, fraud protection, onto others who cannot stop it. Regulate them.
More than 1% of humans can read and create a file on computer. Others know how to read and use a search engine, and way more can be instructed by a LLM on how to do so.
I would say it is nearly as easy as installing waterfox or some other privacy focused fork of Firefox.
This completely negates the nuance and social pressures and sounds like you just want to be edgy. The network affects are huge and others like teachers and clubs are pushing these services as a means of communication instead of using, other, safer services. There is no choice if one wants to be a part of society currently.
We really need the age verification standards to catch up. I think there was stuff in the works, but something like OAuth that doesn't require the two third parties to know about each other and the browser/client is in the middle.
Yes and no, it depends. But that the standards/services don't exist is more an issue as it prevents doing it correctly and safely. Most websites that will/already need to verify someones age are not capable of doing so safely.
Yes and yes, look at the rollout, within weeks it's got through in multiple countries across continents. There is nothing organic about this, it's being pushed and bribed into existence.
Why should one have to endure the intrusion? Why does every product need adverts as it seems to be the place society is going? They are that bad and their place is only potentially in the places that people are looking for said products.
When every product has adverts, is it a choice any longer? Even finding devices, like TV's without ads is more difficult( no on is advertising them :) ) and paying more is often not an option.
Nice of them to start the conversations with a probably lie, that it will be less expensive for consumes because they can now bundle HBO/Netflix. Except this has never been true for more than enough time that for people to forget and past the time to change it, if at all. It will be less selection and cost more, like the usual.
My understanding that this is like that but both libstdc++/libc++ have been doing more since. Additionally, Google did a blog not to long ago where they talked to actual the performance impact on their large C++ codebase and it averaged about 0.3% I think https://security.googleblog.com/2024/11/retrofitting-spatial...
Since then, libc++ has categorized the checks by cost and one can scale them back too.
reply