Yeah, I’ve been looking for this as well. I’ve got a constant check engine light because the catalytic converter is dead, and that’s about the only thing on the car I don’t care about.

Let’s say notifications are like walkie-talkies. You push a button, it sends an alert or your voice to the paired device. Neither one is storing the information, they are just relaying to each other. Now, in this case the government has issued a court order stating that a third party be given a walkie-talkie with the ability to understand the information transmitted by the first. There is still no storage being done, but a second party now receives all the information being broadcast.

It’s not about not having the information. You don’t actually need to store it anywhere to facilitate communication, at least beyond it being in memory which most would agree doesn’t constitute storage in this situation.

Now, could that third party store the information? Absolutely.

Capture and relay have nothing to do with storage. You can absolutely add storage, but it is in no way a necessary step.

My friend, did you read what the article you linked says? That isn’t storing the data, that’s capturing the data and relaying it, as directed by court order.

Yup, ≠ is right “under” =. As is ≈.

… what?

Them: “I want a centralized place to handle all my graphics stuff, so I can access graphically intensive things from any device.”

You: “Must be incest renders because you already have hardware and say you use it for work.”

So according to you, contractors don’t exist, iPhones can play PC games, and anyone wanting to split PC resources between multiple use cases is shady.

What’s ridiculous is that you seem to think extreme paranoia is a normal thing in everyday life.

Most people are under the impression that their IP being public is somehow super dangerous, and that “hackers will attack me” if it ever gets out. So likely “all the attacks against my entire network.”

Edit: Secondary thought, they legitimately have unsecured endpoints on their IP, and are hoping no one will notice if they aren’t handing out their IP to others. Still incorrect though.

May 27th 2024? O.o

Doesn’t matter, there’s a snowballs chance in hell Valve will sell.

If it wasn’t for this comment, I’d have moved on never knowing what it is for. I’m not going to dig my way across the internet to figure out what something is, if it’s worth looking at someone will actually say what it is and what it does.

Sorry, to be clear I meant “block this instance” is a Lemmy feature, but “block users from a blocked instance” is likely client side. And to be clear, the web front ends are also clients. Many of them are non standard.

If you look at the description of the instance blocking, it says it doesn’t block users.

Didn’t mean to confuse things, I should have been more clear.

Could be your client doing that actually, but it’s not a Lemmy feature.

You can block an instance, but not all users from that instance. It’s essentially a “don’t see this instances posts” option.

Did you read the same messages I did? Even the person who posted the comment above said there were three harassing things, and the “pos” comment was harassment only because of those.

Missing the part where the “pos” comment was the only thing db0 said, and the three harassing things were what was being said to him.

If you need mental gymnastics to vilify someone, maybe rethink your position.

I don’t blame you at all. It’s hard to keep your cool when you’re being told “stop hitting me” by the person actively hitting you.

Yeah, I may have mentioned it before, but I was labeled a “pedo apologist” because I defined a word (yandre iirc) while explicitly saying I hadn’t played an objectively horrible game.

They proceeded to intentionally misread my comment, and I was told I was perpetuating things by [drumroll] stating that I hadn’t played the game, and had not defended the game or it’s creator in any way.

One of their admins said (paraphrased) “fine, say you’re sorry, and don’t talk about it again, and we are cool.” An hour later I was banned from the instance.

It’s annoying because I actually enjoyed some of their (non political) communities.

Looking through the thread that got you banned though, they left another user who didn’t know the rules alone, and instead just gave them a “hey that’s not how you do disengaging on this instance.” Seemingly no ban. Nuckin futs.

That first message is to db0, not from. Look at the headers.

There’s like 2 there

Edit: Fucksakes people, read the text in the images. Two of them are the exact same message from db0 with the above/below cropped out. And read the to/from.

The harassment is coming from the person taking the screenshots, db0 is the one not harassing people. Though he isn’t being super nice, I can’t really blame him.

How is calling someone a “disingenuous pos” harassment? Like, mean, sure. But harassment?

My commits are a little too specific to post here, lmao. I likely put too much info into them, I’m still trying to get a good balance.