Welp, I guess this means something bad is gonna happen and Spez is trying to get in front of the inevitable protests.

I wonder what it could be…

I’d watch this movie.

By the subject of the thread alone, I was thinking “Mortal Kombat 8 and Donkey Kong Racing”.

Hmmm… it adds a new meaning to Scorpion saying *"Get over here! " *

Direct link to the remake (KeeperFX) .

Thank you for the post, but I couldn’t get through the cookie management page to read the article.

Illegal stuff? Sure block it, I totally respect the need to CYA.

Blocking lemmit.online 'cause it’s a bot, which yields low content and pollutes “All”? Block lemmynsfw, cause of NSFW content? … well, as an adult I’d prefer I could make that choice for myself and have it governed by my own tolerances.

The defederation topic and how it impacts me.

I’m an adult, if I find something offensive I’ll either block it or ignore it. However, not giving me the choice offends me and IMHO goes against what Lemmy and the fediverse was suppose to deliver.

I understand (and read) the reason’s why site owners defederate and I view it largely as “Lemmy isn’t mature enough to support more granular blocking - yet”, so I wait patiently and hope this trend towards defederation doesn’t turn into a powertrip by site owners “for the good of their users…”

As a kid, I saw a contest on a box of cheerios(?) where you could be an child extra in one of the first TNG episodes. So for most of the first season, I sincerely thought Wil Wheaton/Wesley was the winner.

Anyway, the first few episodes during season 1 were not great, but I was content to finally get some new material. I’m glad TNG had enough time to “find its own groove”.

Oh gee, great. I’m glad development effort was invested in this feature instead of something like having the web app be capable of showing 6 people in a conference call at the same time. /s

Cool, I’ll keep it on my wishlist then.

I’m releaved I’m not the only one worried that GotG might pull too much from their Avengers “formula”.

You mentioned it’s more of an RPG. Does this mean it’s more turn-based combat? Is the game long like Final Fantasy?

I’d be content having either a good story or a fun brawler/hack n’ slash… but (as I mentioned) Avengers failed on both fronts.

Thank you for the link. I’m looking forward to hearing about their “improved version” in 8 months.

Thanks for the write-up and I too bought it before it was delisted (ie: paid < $7.00 for the deluxe edition)… and tbh, I felt I still paid too much.

As you mentioned that campaigns are simple, but I was surprised (and amazingly board ) by how simple the campaigns were. (disclaimer : I did only play for about 2 hours before I got board and never came back). I was hoping for some sort of brawler type game, but the enemies are few but often respawn. I was hoping for something like Shadows of War, but was greatly disappointed. The campaigns were disconnected from each other and the objectives are simply: defeat this enemy, then destroy these targets… there is no real flexible or room for thought, outside of the prepared script you need to follow until the campaign ends.

… and the controls, I found, are quite janky. I was iron man and I found that the movement never really “flowed” into each other, there was always a delay between animation… I really didn’t find it fun. It wasn’t a brawler, it really was a Pay-to-Win platform… even with all the pay gates removed.

People often mention that Guardians of the Galaxy is better… and it is on my wish list, but I’m really suspicious (I hope they improved the controls).

Sounds interesting. Is there a non-paywall link available?

Basically, my company is tightly wed to using outlook and exchange.

We would have liked to have kept all this “on-prem”. Meaning, we have physical machines running in our company network that has paid licenses for exchange.

The “force” that Microsoft has applied, is that we will not be allowed to purchase licenses for exchange (disclaimer: I don’t know if the licenses are not available/discontinued or if it’s not cost effective - I wasn’t involved in those conversations). Long story short: If we want Outlook/Exchange we must use MS Cloud solution. Depending on your organization’s size - this cost us an ungodly amount of money but (and here is where the anti-trust is) you get Office 356, Teams, and the rest of the MS eccosystem “for free” (or at a deep, deep discount).

This means the cost of Cloud Exchange (which includes Teams, O365, etc) . Was about the same (maybe a little less) than what we paid for “on-prem” exchange, plus Google docs, plus slack, plus Zoom. However, since “on-prem” exchange isn’t available - our only other option would be to ditch exchange for Google (which costs a lot more) or some open-source solution (which probably won’t integrate seamlessly into outlook).

Wow, 12 - you’re living the dream ;)

Could you share your setup? I’m on Linux, but I’ve tried both Edge and Brave. Both only show 4 people.

When a 5th person joins, I need to switch to the “group view” (?), which has a auditorium background and crude attempts by Teams to “crop” people from their background.

It’s such a perfect summary of my Teams experience : you want something simple (ie: see 5+ people) and MS delivers the most useless feature… I cannot even call it half passed, cause I’m certain the “group view” took far more engineering effort than it would have taken to just show 5 or more people on the screen.

Oh, it’s worse then that: you want to scrape some content, cut and paste content, save an image, save a stream of music/video - "oh… sorry, you can’t do that Dave cause the command line tool/3rd party website/gui isn’t trusted, but if you subscribe to our ultra premium package you can have some of that functionality unlocked (but just for our site) or you can watch some ads. "

I absolutely agree : our company used slack, Google docs, and self-hosted exchange.

Eventually, MS forced us to replace our self-hosted exchange for MS’ cloud solution. This was basically a ramrod for shoveling O365 and having it replace Slack with Teams and Google Docs with O365.

The migration was painful… going from “I have the exact tools I need for the job” to “jebus, this is the best MS has? On Teams I can only see 4 people at the same time? What was MS thinking”.

Yup, it’s kinda annoying when Google offers links to Reddit that won’t work.

I’m curious, how would you do this in such a way that it wouldn’t come at the expense of effecting your high availability?

If the server were on-prem or in the cloud… and the system crashed/rebooted, how would you decrypt (or add the passphrase) to the encrypted drive?.. cause the likehood of the kernel crashing or a reboot after and update is higher than an FBI raid… and it would get tiresome to have the site being down, while we wait for Bob to wake up, log in, and type the passphrase to mount the encrypted hdd.

You could use something like HashiCorp Vault, but it isn’t perfect either. If the server were rebooted, it could talk to Vault and request the passphrase (automatically) , but this also means that the FBI could also “plug in” the server (at their leisure) and have it re-request the passphrase. … and if Vault were restarted there’s quite a process to unseal (unlock) a vault - so, it would be as cumbersome as needing to type in the passphrase on reboot.

My point / question is: yes, encryption (conceptually) is easy, but if you look at “the whole life cycle / workflow” - it’s much more complicated and you (as an administrator) might ask yourself “does this complexity improve anything or actually protect my users?”

… another option: you use the web based Teams.

If you want more isolation, you could have a dedicated web browser for it.

Of course, the web version of Teams has a few annoying limitations (you can only see 4 people at the same time, opening multiple tabs to Teams kinda breaks it, etc), but it is endurable.

As others have mentioned use a credit card instead of debit.

But if you need/want to use a debit card, then take a look at services like Revolut or Wise (non-referal links included).

Both provide you with debit cards that you can enable/disable instantly within their app. Revolut gives you “virtual cards” which can be used for online subscription, so you can create a dedicated virtual card for each subscription (minimizing the impact if/when one of your cards is leaked). Revolut also has “one time use cards”, so a new debit card number for a single purchase. In practice, more and more vendors are disallowing “one time use cards”, but you can create a similar effect with the virtual cards.

Both platforms also allow you to set up dedicated (monthly) spending limits on either the physical or virtual cards. So you can limit your exposure that way too.