

I hope you’re right and this isn’t about them getting ready to DRM brush handles to brush heads. Sonicare brush heads are ridiculously overpriced compared to the knock offs
I hope you’re right and this isn’t about them getting ready to DRM brush handles to brush heads. Sonicare brush heads are ridiculously overpriced compared to the knock offs
This is a feature of SATA devices too. Use UUIDs in your fstab unless you enjoy playing musical chairs with your mount points
It was only that price if you managed to buy it immediately after going live. The pricing was adjusted a short while later.
Sync has been a one man show for over a decade. Just how fast did you have in mind?
You could do a data request, that should be everything they have on you
it doesn’t cost money and you can use it for anything you like.
This is misrepresenting FOSS quite a bit. A lot of open source software is indeed this permissive, but not all of it. It’s important to refer to the license of each individual project because various licenses have different terms.
Some open source software may be free for personal use, but that license may not extend to other companies seeking to profit off their open source and good will. ZeroTier comes to mind as an example of this.
Further, other licenses like GPL only requires that you make your sources available upon request but you can require that your customers pay you to receive the product: i.e. RHEL. At the end of the day, FOSS means free as in speech, not free as in beer
Updated amd64-microcode for EPYC processors appears available for several distributions which has mitigations available. I went ahead and proactively grabbed the microcode update from Debian unstable (not the best practice) and applied it without issue to my Bullseye/EPYC.
This isn’t exactly condoned as it’s not officially a backport, but I’ll take my chances as this is pretty critical.
Date of the updated microcode should be July 19th.
But salt has the electrolytes the body craves!
The malicious code is only thought to have affected deb/rpm packaging (i.e the backdoor only included itself with those packaging methods). Additionally, arch doesn’t link ssh against liblzma which means this specific vulnerability wasn’t applicable to arch. Arch may have still been vulnerable in other ways, but this specific vulnerability targeted deb/rpm distros