Did you mean to send that reply to me?
I ask because I’m not quite sure what specific suggestions you’re looking for.
But in general, I would suggest not exposing port forwarding.
What services are running behind NGINX? What router/firewall are you using?
They are frequently targeted because they offer enterprise grade configurations at consumer prices.
Which means, there’s a lot that can be misconfigured, and a lot of short staffed and under budgeted IT departments that deploy them, which means they are a good payoff when exploited.
That’s the bad part, and the good part.
You really cannot beat their price point to value for professional grade networking equipment. Just take the time to understand what you’re doing when doing your configurations, and keep them updated.
Absolutely. Especially software that has to interface with specific hardware, which often times can have issues working properly with Windows VMs.
I can just dedicate some old hardware for baremetal Win10, but not everyone has that luxury.
I’ve come across many a users here who don’t know VOA is US State Department propaganda.
In the literal sense, it is an organization funded fully by the US government with the purpose of publishing information that is helpful towards their policy objectives.
That doesn’t mean they’re spreading lies, or somehow equivalent to RT, it’s just a statement of fact. It is the organization’s purpose.
As to your question, maybe they intentionally degraded the quality or substituted a synthetic image for counterintelligence purposes, or maybe it’s just a bad photo, I don’t know.
That’s why humans have brains, for situational awareness.
And it’s less about not breaking for an animal, as it is about not wildly swerving.
Also, you should probably revise your thinking on this before you visit any states that have large animals like Moose on the roads. Because if you plow into one with a car, it can easily kill you when it crushes you after impact.
I’d smash.
They will, but only because he’ll die trying to make toast while taking a bath, or something else actually Darwin Award worthy.
Holy shit.
After reading both of your comments, I am left feeling dumber by at least 12%.
Quick, write about four more of them and I should be good and ready to find my way to a Darwin Award.
U know what i think …
The better question is do I care what you think, and the answer is no, not at all.
But if you insist, I’m sure whatever you’re thinking shouldn’t be too hard to figure out, as there can’t be too many possibilities. What I’m saying is, you give strong vibes of a likely future Darwin Award nominee.
It feels like none of you have actually read the Darwin Awards website that actually you know, coined the phrase.
Simply working a dangerous environment and dying within it, doesn’t make it a Darwin Award, not even a nominee.
She was there to do a job that required a lot of attention on it’s own. You can’t be assigned to photograph skydivers, at an airfield, without having to expend some energy and attention to doing that job.
By your logic, any of the kids who got ground up and killed cleaning meat processing plants, should have been more aware. Guess they’re also Darwin Award winners, at least by your metrics.
Darwin Awards are for deaths that are so stupendously stupid and insane, that the removal of their genes from the gene pool acts as a kind of cleanse.
Such as the guy who stuck a plunger in the shower as a makeshift dildo, held on to the shower curtain rod area for support, which proceeded to break under his weight and impaled him.
That’s an actual Darwin Award. Not this poor lady.
That’s not what Darwin awards are for.
Ironically, the fact that you think it is, means if you have an untimely death, there’s a good chance it will be eligible.
No asshole, read the article before making such callous comments.
She was there, on assignment for work. Small airfields are very dangerous, and this type of accident can happen to anyone who isn’t fully focused on their surroundings. Such as a photographer who is taking photographs as part of their job, steps in the wrong direction.
Yes, Monero fills a niche, and it’s the closest crypto asset to resemble a currency.
However, your previous post talked about replacing finance with Bitcoin. Even if we pretend you were talking about Monero, that just means you have a one world currency, and no one at the helm who can guide monetary policy for any one country.
You shouldn’t need a degree in finance or economics to understand how disastrous that would be, especially for smaller and poorer countries.
So, Bitcoin and the rest of crypto are all commodities, not currencies. They are commodities with a high environmental cost, and a floor of zero because they have no tangible assets to speak of.
Monero can fill a niche, and I’m actually happy about that because I like Monero and the principles behind the project. Unless of course you believe that includes delusions of grandeur and replacing all world currency and financial systems, with the magic of the “just the right crypto”.
Yes
I’ve heard it both ways.
What the fuck dude.
Why are you posting paintings that depict my O face?
This is like Victorian revenge porn.
This has to be a joke right? Satire?
I mean, it’s one thing to be a long on Bitcoin, or even just see it’s value as a niche commodity.
But suggesting Bitcoin mining is an energy efficient way to heat buildings, is capable of replacing global finance, or that it creates more tangible benefits than artisanal glass blowers…?
You know what I can do with a artisanal piece of glass? Hold it, use it, own it.
You know what I can do with Bitcoin? Speculate that if I hold on to it long enough, I can convert it to actual currency that can actually be used as a currency.
Unlike BTC, which is just a speculative commodity, with no tangible assets to provide an actual floor.
The floor on crypto is zero. If I buy a bunch of gold right now, even if the price crashes, I still have a bunch of gold.
People here get really uppity when you point out that Ukraine’s enemy lossss and casualty reports are likely inflated, because that’s what all militaries do in all conflicts. It doesn’t even always have to do with wartime propaganda, but because it’s hard to accurately tally enemy losses during active conflict.
Anyways, when you point that out the usual responses to point out the patently ridiculous reports on Ukrainian losses that the Russian MoD puts out, as if somehow that means Ukraine’s are accurate.
The best I can say is that Ukrainian reports are almost certainly exponentially closer to reality than Russia’s comically absurd and fantastical figures.
I will finish it up by saying that there are good independent sources who open source intelligence to track verified losses, and air on the conservative side.
That of course means their loss reports aren’t accurate either, but they provide a good figures to be used as a floor for any estimate ranges.
On a barely related note, that reminds me of this classic financial media segment.