xist
You'd really hope that's the same logic used when someone doesn't support something too.
Rarely are people's opinions that well informed unfortunately.
I tried powering it back online afterwards. It did not power back on.
a.) lack of monitoring for running services b.) cruft/old configurations
There's almost 300 RFCs related to DNS. It can do many things, and some of them are complex. But human error is almost always the root cause.
Your inability to configure DNS properly speaks more about you, then the service itself.
Did the author need to crank out an "article" before the weekend?
This has been talked about for decades. It's not going to happen. The entire range is unusable at the networking core level, even if you magically had an OS that accepted it.
You can't tweak IPv4 any more. Accept the fact that while IPv6 may seem scary to some, it's the way we _must_ move.
Networking is not scary, learn it.
Virtualbox is designed to be ran on a machine that is already running a desktop OS. It is designed to extend a machine. This is great for a developer.
Vmware/ESXI is a bare metal hypervisor that IS the OS.It effectively partitions a computer hardware and is incredibly stable/secure. This also allows it to do fancy powerful network and storage features directly that an app inside windows/linux/mac can't do.
LoB apps are certified & supported on vmware products. Like the payroll systems you get paid with? If it's running on virtualbox and it does something weird, you're probably not getting paid that week. If it's on Vmware, you better believe you can call people to have it solved asap.
You can make the argument for their consumer editions sure, but that's a different product with different features, different price point for different users.
At the enterprise level where this is intended to be ran, things are much diffrerent.
If you're not aware of the differences or use cases, perhaps you're not the target audience who should be using or configuring it.
I'm doubtful that it's TFW that are buying the properties you're concerned with, especially since they're still at the mercy of PR/work authorization laws that could make them leave the country at any time.
It _could_ happen, but that would be pretty exceptional. You want to complain about foreigners making house prices too high for you, you do you. Just be accurate in your complaints.
> Temporary foreign workers and international students in canada are allowed to buy housing, so aside from renting the rich ones who make it here actually buy up properties for their family offshore.
If they're being paid so little, I don't see how they could possibly afford to buy any properties. I've only known a few, but they all send the majority of the money back home instead.
This feels very fear mongering on TFWs and not grounded in facts.
In fact, Indian Brahmin would seem to contradict with WEF's supposed goals.
wrt Mexican cartels, I'm not sure how that fits into the original narrative of WEF - do Mexican cartels work for the WEF? I've never heard this theory before.
I don't see why any of the groups mentioned would submit themselves to endgoals WEF is supposedly aiming for. I'm skeptical why they would.
> this was the goal of Lenin and Trotsky - complete destruction of the idea of the individual person
You're right UN Agenda 21 _is_ available on the web. Have you actually read it - or have you only read opinions on it?
I have read it and I think you're taking a VERY big leap of faith to connect the dots this way.
If they're trying to destroy the idea of the individual person, what is the end goal? ie. 2023 you say they're going to destroy the idea of the individual person. 2030 they succeed. 2035 ?????
All the "theories" I've seen conveniently forget about China & India - the world's largest population by a long shot. How does these conspiracy of WEF impact them?
Until I see something that doesn't have a "me" complex as the main reasoning I'm going to dismiss it.
He did agree that quantity is not quality and recommended to use "Directory of Open Access Journals" to access a large amount of peer reviewed research that does establish the science.
You should contact everyone referenced in the book/research papers and let them know they're incorrect.
Having an open mind to learn more information is not a weakness.I work in data science adjacent and it's fascinating to see new information being uncovered all the time that does fill in missing information about everything we know - or don't know.
>That is what science has taught us.
Er, no. While you may believe what you wish, the scientific AND medical AND psychological community disagrees with your assertion. There's more research happening into it in the past 10 years than in the past 100 years with some interesting research. Unfortunately people are operating off 50+ years of knowledge handed down in elementary schools or via religion. I don't expect this is an area of study for you, so that's probably why you're not aware of these advances. At one point in time people thought the earth was flat or that people were only righthanded. I'm glad to part of the scientific community that embraces increasing knowledge regardless of how it challenges preconcieved notions. That's what science is.
Regardless, your claims relating to Lysenko are extremely hyperbolic at best - for either group in the comparison.
Trans people exist. Full Stop. Anything more than a 5 min scan of our history and scientific back to recorded times show they do exist. And there's lots of research being done today that was not done decades ago when people started to formulate their opinions. We obviously don't know everything yet but like I mentioned I expect in 50 years a lot of questions will be put to rest.
> There's no objective and empirical measurement to support anyone's claim of an alternative gender identity. Choosing to believe such claims, and then acting upon them (e.g. by housing males in women's prisons, letting males compete in women's sports, etc.) is an ideological stance.
^-- That also is an ideological stance whether you intend it or not. I don't believe the harm in the claims. The amount of people that are affected by your 2 examples seems to be in the hundreds, maybe thousands world wide so I'm perplexed why people spend so much time worrying about such edge cases.
That feels quite controlling and oppressive and I expect you would hate others to do the same to you.
What I don't understand is how this personally affects you, and why this matters so much to yourself. Were you in a prison with a trans person? Did a trans person beat you in a swimming competition last night? What did a trans person do to you?
- What is the proof that this person is not what they claim of? (ie, what ideology of yours makes you convinced of this?). This ties into deeply philosophical questions - what makes you "you"? Do you have a conscience? A soul? Is your brain the source of your identity or is your loins? Does your loins control your brain and thus your existence?
But on a more direct reply - anthropology has made some significant discoveries about the history of people - including trans people. I would encourage you to look into that for more information - assuming you wish to learn more about the subject.
I would also encourage you to google (or bing) terms such as "trans people brains" where there's a lot of neurological research being done. First google hit i find is https://health.clevelandclinic.org/research-on-the-transgend...
There's lots of information out there, and more is being discovered every day so it's very useful to keep your eyes open on evidence - and not personal beliefs.
There's lots of evidence going back to egyptian times supporting the science behind this. Unfortunately most people only see the surface level sound bites thrown out in the media and make up their mind based on that - or what their own religion has pushed forward.
I suspect that fifty years from now we will have built on all the existing knowledge (including historical) and have a more refined understanding put together.
This can be proven by when you go into uninstall it look at the space used. It will be tiny.
Part of the reason those shortcuts are there are on consumer editions because a) lots of people have no clue how to do anything and need a helping hand b) the vendors pay to have that installed as marketing, which helps lower the cost of the windows license
But you can disable and remove it - manually. These scripts do it automatically for you as a convenience but the ability is there.
In enterprise versions of Windows, there's tighter control and less "features"/bloatware installed by default, and you can use GPOs and other settings to deal with it very easily. This of course comes at a cost that most endusers don't want to pay.
Feel free to purchase the non home versions of Windows and you will find there _is_ a choice.
Splitting hairs perhaps, but a lot of people don't/won't understand the difference - or why you did this.
Most non home users use Windows Enterprise and GPOs to achieve these results, where things are more fine tuned and can be reversed as needed.
You can confirm this by looking at the size of the application when you goto uninstall it.
The most likely reason is a stripped down version of periphal support, no new feature releases etc. It's more of set and forget installations rather than a daily driver.
2 reasons - a lot of endusers appreciate it surprisingly, and some of those bloat of preinstalled applications subsidizes the cost to make it cheaper to purchase.
You can prove this by when you try to uninstall it look at the size.
This can be considered clutter on your screen but it's not causing any performance degradation.
Nor do they understand what this does. It's turned into internet folklore by people "just run this and good stuff happens, i don't know exactly what but trust me"
I'm assuming you've measured this can you provide stats I'd be curious which components of Windows 11 is causing this. I'm assuming you've downgraded to Windows 10 on this machine with the exact software versions loaded to determine this?
Causation and correlation are 2 separate things so I would caution you from making sweeping statements.
You are not entitled to access a website and the website doesn't know if you're a "good" or "bad" person automatically.
Put another way, if 9/10 of all phone calls/text messages sent to you are antagonistic at all hours of the day with NO filtering, would you accept that?
If so please post your unfiltered phone number that you will always answer, or your email address that has no spam filtering on it.
When most of the traffic on the internet is junk, some level of filtering is required.
How does a website determine if you're a "good" person, or a hacker who will destroy them otherwise?