[-] [email protected] 7 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

When I click any of these links, I get an error.....

[-] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago
[-] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago

I understood that. But I don't see how you came down to this conclusion simply because someone put Linux inside Linux.

When you put matryoshka russian dolls one inside the other, do you also think "man, we live in a simulation"?

[-] [email protected] 6 points 6 days ago

Technically, yes. But the article already mentioned the amount of effort for the brute force to succeed (that is, practically never, if the phrase is truly random.)

But anyway. With regular passwords, the attackers already have a list: the alphabet plus numbers and symbols. Not really that different.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

My interpretation of impact includes both positive and negative sentiments.

Whereas you are saying that a negative thing doesn't count as impact.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 6 days ago

Not that I don't disagree with you, but how did you come down to this conclusion?

[-] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

You are making a red-herring argument.

The post's question is: "What technology made the most impact in modern times?"

A poster says "Chemical fertilizers" and detailed the reasons.

And then you come in and say "NU-UH, IT DESTROYS THE PLANET!!!" an argument that has nothing to do with the question.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

You can see this in the U.S. as well.

In many parts of the world, though, I wouldn't say cars per se, but definitely public transportation. A lot of people can't afford cars in the world, and they still benefit from the invention of the internal combustion engine.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

its* polarization (or polarisation, in your part of the world.)

view more: next ›

laughterlaughter

joined 5 months ago