I'm just saying that it's similar from an average user point of view. You set it up once, then your app generates a unique code that the server can associate with you in a way that can't be broken by a third party watching traffic.
I’m pretty inclined to downvote any post that is a link without a short summary or context.
Why? The summary of Firefox release notes is the Firefox release notes.
I agree there should be a summary for other things, esp. videos or long articles, but for release notes, they're already generally in a condensed format. This one is a few pictures with a couple sentences explaining what's new in them.
"The max" is the highest voltage the battery can safely store with reasonable losses, and "empty" is the lowest voltage the battery can safely charge from. Or something like that, I'm not a battery engineer. There's surely a bit of buffer here since users will use it outside of ideal circumstances (ambient temperature, heat dissipation, etc).
Regardless, those numbers come from the battery manufacturer. I'm guessing phone manufacturers add some extra buffer given the properties of the phone (heat generated by electronics, heat dissipation of the case, etc).
None of that has anything to do with what I'm talking about.
The 20-80% range is on top of that and is based on efficiencies in battery tech. That's the sweet spot of battery longevity, and some phone manufacturers limit charging to the top end and most (all?) warn when you hit the lower bound. But not all manufacturers report 100% when it hits that upper bound of that range. Many do, but not all. Some report 80% and let you bypass it, and some don't cap that upper bound.
Sure, if the manufacturer sets it to not charge to the max. I'm saying some manufactured charge to the max by default, hence why that setting is useful.
I'm saying when your phone charges to 100%, some manufacturers take that to mean 80% of capacity, whereas others actually charge the battery to 100% of capacity.
No, I'm saying that not all manufacturers have that limit, and it's a relatively new setting (last few years). If you have an older phone or something not from the top few manufacturers, it might not have that feature.
Betteridge's law of headlines is an adage that states: "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no." It is based on the assumption that if the publishers were confident that the answer was yes, they would have presented it as an assertion; by presenting it as a question, they are not accountable for whether it is correct or not.
Yup, I use the terminal every day at work, my workflow is VIM + tmux, and I self hosted a Minecraft server using systemd (and a bunch of other stuff), so CLIs are kinda my thing.
I don't use MPV. Why? I watch my content on my TV. If I'm on my computer where MPV could be used, I'll play video games or work on personal projects, not watch content. Jellyfin is easy enough that I had to block the app on my TV since my 3yo was watching it before I got up. It works really well, it's easy to set up, and even a child who can't read can use it.
My SO is reasonably technically inclined, and still keeps forgetting they have the SMB share on there. It's literally a folder like any other on their PC.
They do remember both the IP/port (our TV sucks and loses WiFi periodically, and Jellyfin forgets the info) and the URL (can't use TLS on the TV apparently...). And that inconvenience is way less of an issue than dealing with an already mounted SMB share.
Yeah, I'm not connecting my computer to my TV to watch something. Jellyfin streams to it without that nonsense, why would I go back to essentially sneakernet?
It misses the primary use case for me: streaming to TV. I used to use minidlna, but the UX on my TV sucked, and Jellyfin was a pure upgrade. I can count the times I've watched more than 30a of my media (to test something) on anything other than my TV on one hand, and all of those are on a tablet using cached files.
If I did watch media on my laptop or desktop, I'd mount a network share and use VLC or something.
The company I work for forces everyone to do a training every year that goes over all of that and a few others. I assume most larger companies do the same.
None of this has anything to do with password managers, but knowing how to install stuff properly.
If you think you've only been in one breach, you're probably mistaken or very young. I don't know how many breaches I've been involved in, but it's at least double digits.
I'm American, and my Social Security number has been leaked multiple times. Each time I've done everything possible to secure my accounts (random passwords, TOTP 2FA where possible, randomized usernames, etc), yet there's always a new breach that impacts me.
I'm not too worried though. My important accounts are pretty secure. I use one of the few banks (brokerage actually) that provides proper 2FA. My email and password manager use 2FA. My credit is frozen. Breaches happen, the important thing is to limit the impact of a breach.
Yeah, the implementation is very different.
I'm just saying that it's similar from an average user point of view. You set it up once, then your app generates a unique code that the server can associate with you in a way that can't be broken by a third party watching traffic.