I succeeded in doing this once long ago. Then while in the Linux vm I wiped the VM’s partition table, which wiped the physical disk partition table, including windows. Do not recommend.
I succeeded in doing this once long ago. Then while in the Linux vm I wiped the VM’s partition table, which wiped the physical disk partition table, including windows. Do not recommend.
I think you should reconsider Proton. It seems to tick all of your boxes except US-based. However, I know they have US-based VPN servers, so I expect they have US-based email servers as well. It’s worth asking their support team about.
Are all of those drives powered up constantly? What’s your power bill like?
Ah, yes, I live on “St Mary’ ; DROP TABLE street”
Consider how well Lotus Notes handles your form>…>messaging pipeline. Why aren’t we still using an evolution of that? There’s always a shiny new technology that promises to fix all of the problems of the previous ones.
Get a BeagleBoard! https://www.beagleboard.org/boards/beaglev-ahead
Edit: or a Star64! https://pine64.com/product-category/star64/
Yes a back up is possible. Don’t back up partitions, back up the whole device. All 150+g at once.
Whenever you try to mount the device or the filesystems, make sure to mount it read-only so that no changes are written to the device.
Also, shrinking 84g of data into 32g is definitely not possible. Just changing the fdisk partition table doesn’t shrink or relocate the data. You need a filesystem-aware resizing tool to shrink the filesystem before shrinking the partition.
Hopefully you can just change the partition table back to the original values and get a clean fsck.
Well, time to go watch Black Mirror again. You know, the one with the robot dog that hunts you, or the one with the quadcopters that kamikaze tap you on the head with explosives?
Ditching TCP/IP and defining a whole new protocol stack would require your ISP to have routers that know how to route this new protocol without IP addresses. Also, every router between the source and destination would have to support the protocol also. That seems like a huge hurdle. We can’t even get mainstream ISPs to support IPv6 in the last 25 years.
Unless the author intends to layer this on top of IP, which defeats the defined goal.
If you did this, you would be running your own “Internet” with only your own routers connecting to each other.
https://mbasic.facebook.com/ still works. It’s missing some modern niceties, but usable. That’s what I use for occasional messages.
Like Myst? I love those. Have you tried The Witness?
I never got past the first boss on the horse.
I’m all for celebrating his life, but this happened in 2018.
Unless the AI processing is much more specialized than graphics, I think manufacturers would put that effort into making more powerful GPUs that can also be used for AI tasks.
It probably won’t affect Fedora because that’s already a consumer-oriented distro. For me, it’s a philosophical question. Do you want to run a distro that is supported by a company who would behave that way?
What did you find in Fedora that you didn’t find in the other distros? Was it something about the graphical interface, or was it more about the system packaging ecosystem and developers?
In other words, if the sha matches, then it wasn’t corrupted during downloading. If the signature matches, then it wasn’t tampered with before you downloaded it.
There’s also a third check. Even if the certificate signature is valid, you have to have confidence that the certificate is authentic and trusted to be from the original author. This is usually done by having a trusted third party sign the certificate with another, more trusted, certificate.
If you get the sha256 from the same place you got the main file, then anyone tampering with the main file could also recalculate the sha256 to match the tampered file. A signature signed with a certificate uses complex math (public-key asymmetric cryptography) to give some certainty that the signed content (the sha256) is the same sha256 that the original file author created. It’s not mathematically feasible to recalculate the certificate signature. Why don’t we just sign the whole original file with the public-key crypto and skip the sha256? Because asymmetric crypto is much, much slower than plain symmetric crypto or hash functions. It’s faster and easier to generate the valid hash or key, then sign or encrypt just the smaller key.
Also on iOS: Settings > Phone > Silence Unknown Callers