|
A friend's laptop got locked for ransom. She asked me too look at it, but I told her I didn't think there was much I would be able to do. I created a Ubuntu thumb drive, booted to that and mounted her drive. It turns out the scumbag only locked the boot partition. I was able to just copy off her unencrypted My xxx folders. So, like you, I was a hero because the crook was dumb.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, They are making it "opt-in" (for a feature nobody wants) and fixing the horrible security holes (presently known).
Microsoft:
"Now hold your nose and take your medicine, it's good for you. Trust us, would we lead you astray?"
/s
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Stachelski 2021 wrote: They are making it "opt-in"
For now...
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
You're absolutely right. Something needs to be done about this trend.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
The overall complexity of the multiple changes they've made speak to just how insidious this feature is.
Their public statement says that snapshots are not shared with microsoft, but it is noticeably silent about what it does with the results of the processing it performs on the snapshots.
Plus, I tend to think that the snapshots' persistence on the machine is only for the purpose of providing the potemkin "feature" to the users.
I'll bet that your screen is processed every 5 seconds whether the feature (the storing of the snapshots) is on or off.
Here's an assertion from the MS statement:Quote: First, we are updating the set-up experience of Copilot+ PCs to give people a clearer choice to opt-in to saving snapshots using Recall.
Notice that it says that users can opt-in to saving snapshots, not taking snapshots.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
modified yesterday.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Andrew x64 wrote: Notice that it says that users can opt-in to saving snapshots, not taking snapshots.
It is like the updates.. (officially) you can pause for a while and choose when to reboot, but not deactivate them
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
I trusted unknown developers with their "patches" more than MS until Win7. I guess I will do it again from 11 onwards - though I will most probably skip it.
GCS/GE d--(d) s-/+ a C+++ U+++ P-- L+@ E-- W+++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
The shortest horror story: On Error Resume Next
|
|
|
|
|
We see a whole load of posts about how Microsoft sucks. Well, this is praise for them. In my day to day, I do a load of API design work using OpenAPI. Frankly, while OpenAPI is great, the tooling and development of it is less than amazing. It's cumbersome, and it doesn't promote easy reuse. Well, Microsoft has produced something called TypeSpec[^] which makes API design an absolute delight. It's now supplanting my tool of choice (SwaggerHub). So, I want my APIs to return all records on an endpoint and I want them to have common statuses on the return. Well, if I do this:
op all<T>(): {
@statusCode statusCode: 200;
@body records: T[];
} | {
@statusCode statusCode: 400;
@body error: Error;
} | {
@statusCode statusCode: 401;
} | {
@statusCode statusCode: 403;
};Then I can do this:
@route("/organizations")
interface Organizations {
op all is all<Organization>;
}Well, what does that look like when I produce my OpenAPI design out of this?
openapi: 3.0.0
info:
title: Some title
version: 0.0.0
tags: []
paths:
/organizations:
get:
operationId: Organizations_all
parameters: []
responses:
'200':
description: The request has succeeded.
content:
application/json:
schema:
type: array
items:
$ref: '
'400':
description: The server could not understand the request due to invalid syntax.
content:
application/json:
schema:
$ref: '
'401':
description: Access is unauthorized.
'403':
description: Access is forbidden
components:
schemas:
Organization:
type: object
required:
- id
- name
- apiKey
properties:
id:
type: string
format: uuid
description: The unique identifier for the organisation
name:
type: string
description: The name of the organisation
servers:
- url: https://api.my.services
description: Single Endpoint
variables: {}All in all, that's pretty darn awesome and it allows me to produce consistent API responses with the minimum of fuss.
|
|
|
|
|
In my case, most of my posts against Microsoft are mostly in the insider news and more in joke, sacarsm mode than real rants.
At the end of the day I am still using it and will still use it (at least at job)
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
To be honest, I don't understand what the point of that TypeSpec is, because it doesn't generate C# REST API's. 
|
|
|
|
|
Welllllll.... this[^] is what I use on that front.
|
|
|
|
|
https://www.charachorder.com/products/charachorder-one[^]
synopsis : a uniquely shaped keyboard permitting "chords" i.e. simultaneous key strokes also w/ minimum finger movement i.e. each key has four associated characters via joy-stick like motion North South East West. also other product converting conventional keyboard to chording.
|
|
|
|
|
It was hard enough/took long enough for me to learn how to type the first time around. I'd rather not have to repeat it.
Check out my IoT graphics library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/gfx
And my IoT UI/User Experience library here:
https://honeythecodewitch.com/uix
|
|
|
|
|
isnt't this somewhat similar to court stenographer keyboards ?
CI/CD = Continuous Impediment/Continuous Despair
|
|
|
|
|
They each permit chording but the logic differs. Also steno keys have but one value each. Maybe steno keyboards should follow their example and permit joystick like keys so the fingers might never move but merely twitch to the compass points.
|
|
|
|
|
I've always suspected those types of keyboard might be well suited for paragraphs of text, but when it comes to programming languages, where you often have to type brackets, parens, semicolons, etc...how well do they work?
|
|
|
|
|
Chording is not required for all input.
|
|
|
|
|
I remember those keyboards from the early 1980s, but at that time they didn't make any great success. Maybe they will this time.
(My old keybord started failing last week, after 8 years of trouble free operation. Maybe I should consider this alternative for a replacement.)
Religious freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make five.
|
|
|
|
|
A rectangular, beige keyboard with dark brown fingertip shaped buttons that all fitted under the palm of one hand? I recall something like that too.
The Microwriter[^] - is this what you're thinking of?
|
|
|
|
|
The ones I were thinking of were like two hemispheres, one for each hand, with one button per finger (so you could input 10-bit character codes in a single chord  ). Size was about as if you cut a large orange in two - one for each hand - but I believe that they were black. I never saw them in real life, only photos in ads.
I've got a huge pile of BYTE magazine from the late 1970s and early 1980s, and I was seriously considering flipping through those to see if I could find it there. But the pile is too big; it would take more time than I think it is worth.
Religious freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make five.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think I ever saw those.
|
|
|
|
|
Page says "This text was typed at the speed of thought"
I already do that.
And I doubt it is going to make me think faster. So no reason for me to use it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've got a manual 6-point Braille typing machine sitting on a shelf in my basement. It really should be placed in the exercise room - it is a great tool for building the strength in your fingers!
Next to it sits a Braille PC printer. The noise level is so high that when we wanted to use it, we had to give all neighbors a warning in advance. It is not functional now; I haven't had a PC with an LPT port for ages. There used to be USB-to-LPT adapters available; I hope they still are if I ever need to put the printer to work again. Currently, I have no need for it.
Religious freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make five.
|
|
|
|
|
50% of the time, this is a nice feature.
The other 50%, I hate it as I have to clean up the BS it adds. Like
using static System.Runtime.InteropServices.JavaScript.JSType;
using System.Runtime.Intrinsics.X86;
using System.Security.Policy;
using Twilio.TwiML.Voice; Seriously? Where does it think I need those???  And yes, I know I can turn this off, somewhere, but the 50% when I like it, I want it.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
