Th4tGuyII

Good resellers do, but I think my point still stands - why risk any of that when Microsoft doesn’t get your money either way?
MAS/Massgrave works effectively, is open source, is well-documented, and literally free.

Considering the grey market is filled with dodgy keys, it’d be better to just pirate, especially when there are easy and safe ways to do it like with MAS

If you must have MS office, then I’d go with MAS/Massgrave like others have said.

It’s well documented, requires minimal setup (if going default route), and is much less risky than going into the grey market for keys or downloading cracks elsewhere.

Haste makes waste - if you want quality content, let the dev and their team take the time they need.

True. While it’s definitely more secure than their other 2FA offering (storing them with your passwords), it’s still the same developers making both - so it still feels like putting all my eggs in one basket.

For IOS I can see this as a valid option, because unless you are willing to trust Microsoft, Google, or Authy with your 2FA, which I personally don’t think one should, then you haven’t got too many options.

But on Android there are plenty others that are known to be reliable, Aegis for example, so the value proposition is lessened for me at least.

Cool idea for anyone who doesn’t already use Bitwarden for their passwords, but I would be awfully sceptical of having my passwords and 2FA codes stored on the same service - only one breach required to royally screw me up

I’m a bit late to the party, but I would be inclined to agree with the majority here. Your choice to have their cookies deleted on browser close is adding more friction to an already quite high friction process - you managed to get them to switch over, you don’t want to undo all that over cookies of all things.

You have to remember, it is their machine at the end of the day, and while you might be able to put up with having to redo 2FA loads due to cookie deletion, they’re clearly not… And if that’s going to be the dealbreaker, you’re far better off forgetting cookie deletion for now and focusing on more passive privacy options like blocking 3rd party cookies, trackers, and ADs.

The rich Tories who stand to make bank off it being that way. Who would’ve thought it’s a bad idea to let the rich decide things for the masses.

It keeps looking more and more like the Tories are going to get their way as they keep knee-capping the NHS over and over again with a stagnant budget in the face of ever rising costs/demands.

They want to make the NHS shit to incentivise people going to private, so they can justifying privatising more and more of our NHS, until we end up looking like the US.

Honestly, fuck the Tories

I was genuinely confused by this statistic until I realised it was a double negative. YouTube losen’t Google a lot of money.

In terms of online presence I think one has to be careful about becoming too private - at what point do you become so untrackable that even people you would like to find you (I.e. old friends) can’t anymore.

Oh great they get to collect and make money off of “anonymous technical data” for years, and their punishment for doing all that is to delete the data, and swear they won’t collect anymore of it for the next few years??

They already made their money off of people’s data! This isn’t a meaningful punishment, hell it’s barely a slap on the wrist.

I’d love to chance to play a bunch of nostalgic titles - just off the top of my head I’d play DOOM, Uplink, Darwinia, Morrowind, and my trashy favourite from that era Themepark world. There are definitely more if I had time to think about it.

…

Dude - you’re either stupid enough to not realise the irony of what you’ve just said, or you’re trolling. For your sake, I kinda hope it’s the latter

This essentially boils down to big business wanting all the reward without any of the risk - they’ve turned artists into their own self-promoters so even when artists are new, they already have a stable audience to sell to, at the expense of the artist of course

Edit: … at some point you might as well self-publish too, but that brings its own damn problems

deleted by creator

Yeah - that was my worry.

Unification of standards only works if everyone agrees to use it and only it (i.e. mobile phones and USB C), otherwise you’re just adding another one to the pile.

The rest of the world got the right version of the man’s work

Which is (or at least should be) “Aluminium” because that’s the internationally agreed IUPAC spelling.

We gave up the cooler spelling of Sulfur to be consistent with IUPAC - if we can do that, then surely giving up on “-num” should be a cakewalk.

Except it’s not clickbait - I’ll cite Wikipedia so you can look yourself, but they’re not the same thing.

Rose Gold is a proper alloy of Gold, made with Copper.

Purple Gold is an “intermetalic” (which have a different molecular structure to normal alloys and thus are more brittle), and is made with Aluminium.

Due to it’s brittleness even amongst intermetalics, it is considered hard to work with, much more so than a proper alloy like Rose Gold. The only similarity they share is their colour ranges can overlap dependent on how they’re made.