teawrecks

joined 1 year ago
[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 4 points 2 months ago

Cheesy Gordita Crunch

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 months ago

The way I see it, if it's a rule of film to "show, don't tell", then it should be a rule of games to "engage, don't show and tell".

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 3 points 2 months ago

Here's hoping they build something useful that can be forked to work without the garbage.

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 3 points 2 months ago

People don't argue as hard if you convince them not to take you seriously.

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 6 points 2 months ago (4 children)

As someone still playing through vanilla Elden Ring, none of that means anything to me. And if my first 80h are any indication, I'll finish the game and still have no idea.

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 5 points 2 months ago (8 children)

You're thinking of "redundant".

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 20 points 2 months ago (10 children)

"Essential lore" is an oxymoron in these games

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 months ago

Yeah that's true. Not always ideal, though. I'd prefer the option to spoof a location to the app, just to avoid dealing with apps that unnecessarily block features when you deny them location permissions.

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I assume it's part of the security for the app to not even know whether the GPS data was ever there.

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 9 points 2 months ago

Agreed. As I understand it, $50k-$100k is on the high end for a TV show to use a clip from a very well known song in an episode. Some band I've never heard of being paid $22k for their song to be played in the background of a game might be a little on the low end, so it's totally reasonable for the band to counter, but it's also totally reasonable for Rockstar to turn down a 10x counter. Publicly crying about it seems childish. The game is gonna happen with or without your song.

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 3 points 2 months ago

Agreed. Anyone who thinks it's ok to just expose ssh on 22 to the internet has never looked at their logs. The port will be found in minutes, and be hammered by thousands of login attempts by multiple bots 24/7. Sure you can block repeat failed logins, but that list will just always be growing.

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 7 points 2 months ago (7 children)

Normal for who? I wouldn't expose SSH on 22 to the internet unless you have someone whose full time job is monitoring it for security and keeping it up to date. There are a whole lotta downsides and virtually no upsides given that more secure alternatives have almost zero overhead.

view more: ‹ prev next ›