and seeding seems to work for me.

You can only seed to people who have ports open. At least one side of the connection needs to be reachable.

It’s people like me who keep ports available that are able to seed to you.

But editing code running on your computer should be protected as well… I’m personally pretty torn on this one. Ultimately I think that server-side is the only real answer.

Well… No offense… but duh? It’s not like OP can migrate his spouses “[email protected]” address to his mail server.

I was under the assumption (and I could be wrong) that OP owns the domain… And wants to run their mailboxes. If she wants to keep her own mailbox and use it, just forward it to her gmail if that’s what she wants. I’m also not insinuating forcing someone into something.

I own my domain(you guessed correctly) and host my own emails. My spouse does use an inbox on my server(actually a few)… If she didn’t want to anymore she can open a mailbox where-ever she wants… and I’ll even forward whatever I get to her. That’s it. Wouldn’t stop me from running my own inbox on my own server. And I’m not forcing her to do anything at all. She can use it or not.

This is the mentality I have when I made the previous comments. Just forward her stuff off, she can go wherever she wants.

Until the basement floods and the server goes offline for a few days

That’s what backups are for.

or botched upgrade that’s failing quietly;

See above

over zealous spam assassin configuration;

That’s an assumption that you’re using this specific product.

What’s funny is you think that all of this can’t happen to your stuff on Google’s servers either for some reason… Say the wrong thing in a Youtube comment? Boom whole google profile banned. All your emails are gone too.

Or random software that interfaces poorly with each other (https://support.google.com/mail/thread/142335843/all-of-my-emails-have-disappeared-how-can-i-recover-them?hl=en)

SMTP is stupidly forgiving. You’re not going to magically lose singular emails.

This article is referencing new bills that will disenfranchise legitimately registered voters

No. This is what you stated. Instead of showing where any disenfranchisement would happen you quoted

Some Democrats contend the measures could create hurdles for legal voters

This is not evidence of any disenfranchisement is occurring Instead you’re just wildly speculating that there’s some random clear pattern of some sort that simply doesn’t exist.

But one thing is for sure, my wife won’t have any of it. She’s a total backwards thinking give me windows or I’ll jump kind of Gal.

So… forward her inbox to her personal gmail account? Keep your mail server as it was for you?

Some people believe the world is flat. That doesn’t make the statement true. They provided no clear example of how any of it could be doing what they claim it would do. So that random statement starting with “some democrats”… is meaningless.

By changing the language from “all citizens”, it sets up opportunities to selectively disenfranchise those citizens who are able and registered to vote.

No it doesn’t because the verbiage is “ONLY citizens” as the replacement. It’s still VERY clear that citizens are to vote. What it clears up is any argument that non-citizens should also be allowed to vote.

All of the legislation and proposals in this area come from Republicans trying to make it harder for non-citizens to vote.

Yes… Which they can’t do anyway.

https://lemmy.saik0.com/comment/3543053

The ballot initiatives only clarifies and fixes verbiage to make it more clean. Nothing about this is actually making it any harder for legitimate citizens to vote.

I might even go another step and say that it’s an effort to delegitimize our elections by claiming fraud to pave the way for illegitimate power grabs (like Jan 6).

If you say so.

Can you provide the ruling?

As far as I understand it was simply an “agreement”. Not a legal decision/ruling. Nothing stops M$ from appealing it regardless with this new information. And pointing to MacOS and Android and asking why they’re not being enforced the same way.

And just because a current ruling OR agreement is in place. Doesn’t mean they don’t want to do it. They can easily just make the process harder for those that want Kernel access which could still have the same effect.

This article is referencing new bills that will disenfranchise legitimately registered voters

Please quote where it says that. I see no such statement.

What’s on the ballot?

Republican-led legislatures in eight states have proposed constitutional amendments on their November ballots declaring that only citizens can vote.

Proposals in Iowa, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Wisconsin would replace existing constitutional provisions stating that “every” citizen or “all” citizens can vote with new wording saying “only” citizens can vote. Supporters contend the current wording does not necessarily bar noncitizens from voting.

In Idaho and Kentucky, the proposed amendments would explicitly state: “No person who is not a citizen of the United States” can vote. Similar wording won approval from Louisiana voters two years ago.

Voters in North Dakota, Colorado, Alabama, Florida and Ohio passed amendments between 2018 and 2022 restricting voting to “only” citizens.

What about changing verbiage to be clear is “Disenfranchise”?

Nothing disenfranchising about unlinking 2 completely different systems that really shouldn’t have been linked to begin with. Licensing drivers and voting together automatically doesn’t make sense if you’re granting licenses to those who aren’t eligible to vote…

If it happens so little that it doesn’t matter, then why relax the standard? It’s clearly working then. You spook people who think it could happen when you do that. There’s no positive to doing that. So why do it?

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

You have a better chance of getting a clear picture of Bigfoot than you do of having a voter fraud incident in your jurisdiction.

Just because you don’t see it. doesn’t mean it’s not there. It would be entirely possible that there is no enforcement… and thus no records of those events happening.

Just like “illegal” border crossings. Current numbers state “Nationwide Encounters” is the number that CBP publishes. That’s not the number of border crossings. That’s the number of people that law enforcement has encountered and handled. This clearly ignores those who weren’t “encountered” but still made it over. Part of that “encountered” number would be things like, “how many border guards do we have to actually ‘encounter’ these people?” If you fired 100% of the border guard force. Well your “Nationwide Encounters” stats would also drop to near 0. That doesn’t mean that there are no longer any border crossings.

Poll workers collecting votes on voting day have no way to validate if your voter registration is not valid. It’s either you’re on the list or not. And in a lot of jurisdictions, simply getting a driver’s license is enough to get your name on that list, even if you aren’t allowed to vote otherwise.

Let’s make some safe presumptions. There are at least some non-zero amount of people who vote illegally (ignore if they’re “illegal immigrants” or not, just in general). How is discarding their votes and pursuing those felony charges enforced? Is that effective? If the answer is “poll workers”, how are they supposed to know who on their registers are not supposed to be there in states that do auto-registration? There is discussion to have here without even bringing up a singular specific source of fraud like this article does.

SteamDeck (and other handhelds like that) are super convenient to demo things out on. Don’t have to lug entire systems to trade shows. Just load up a dozen decks in a bag preloaded with whatever the most stable or latest build of your game is.

It makes sense for these trade shows. More of your game gets into people hands for that crucial demo. Less time wasted waiting in queue at the 2 PCs you brought instead.

Games - Nah that’ll continue on as it has, some get cracked and some don’t, it is what it is.

with Crowdstrike and other considerations… M$ already wants to close kernel access to their systems. This will make most DRM ineffective. I think games in specific will become significantly easier to crack in the near future.

Especially as linux handhelds continue to catch on and do their thing.

Oftentimes that comes out of department budgets. That’s not necessarily 100% tuition funded.

Edit: meaning printer stuff… my department had our own photocopy machine. It was a department asset.

But this “overall” plan was basically fictional—it was a model, and apparently not an accurate one. Georgia Tech doesn’t have a unified IT setup; it has hundreds of different IT setups, including a different one at most research labs.

Yes… this is actually common. Your typical state school is actually made up of many different colleges working in tandem with each other. The nursing “school” is different than the law “school” at your university. Often even holding completely different names internally.