Pika

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I would be changing banks. That's super unreasonable

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

No they are going to argue that there should have been a fail safe in place for a rapid recovery of said incident occurring in the first place. Since the TSA required it

I personally don't think that should resolve crowdstrike of all responsibility, but the fact that they lack these contingency plans in the first place makes me think that CS is definitely not the only one at fault here

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Fully agreed that crowdstrike is partly responsible, however my comment was based off of Microsoft not crowdstrike. Delta stated they were going to sue both crowdstrike and Microsoft, but they didn't actually go through with it

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Honestly agreed, I think it's reasonable for a company as big as Delta to have a functioning continuity plan, the fact that it took them over 5 days to come back online is Unforgivable for a service that is detrimental to society like a transportation service.

Personally speaking I think that the 500 million lawsuit should be thrown out exclusively on that. It is Delta's inability to properly manage their company's IT services that exclusively cause this.

I'm not down playing crowdstrike here, what they did is unforgivable as well because how they manage their software completely bypassed all channels that are meant to prevent shit like this from happening, but every other system was online within two days if that, because they had proper failsafes in place to minimize damages and regain operational status.

But ultimately, crowd strikes mess up was obviously an error on their end, where Delta not having a proper procedure in place is obviously intentional as having a Disaster Recovery where you lose most of your infrastructure has been IT management 101 for years now.

Being said, I do not agree that crowdstrike should be allowed to operate in the level that it was allowed to in the first place, and I definitely Embrace Microsoft's decision to start heading towards locking out access to ring 0 in favor of ring 1 and ring 2. With this decision I'm wondering if intel is going to revise their plans for the new x86S framework to not have ring 1 and 2 and only have 0 and 3

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

Dude the precident it would set if Delta sued Microsoft and won would be super damaging I'm glad it's not happening

Imagine being responsible for a software that is put on A system that you developed, with you being isolated/removed from the situation, it would be the content owners of websites being responsible for Stuff posted all over again

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

You joke but like, they are already pushing a twitch style sub model pretty hard already with the youtube "private sub" system that creators can do, it grants you access to videos that the creator marked as a subscription only, which is basically the same thing, as it shows you the video, and a tiny "sub only" label, and when you try to open it it brings you to the sub page.

I forsee in the future youtube moving to a fully monetary model with only brand issued content being "free" and everything else requiring youtube premium

[–] [email protected] 23 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

the content creator isn't following the proper system then. You don't need YouTube to do a copyright/IP violation claim. Google is actually opening themselves up to significantly hot water if they are indeed refusing to allow a process for DMCA on creators that are deleted off the platform, as there are severe penalties for not reacting to a DMCA claim when you are a content provider.

If they actually owned the rights to the videos, that creators first step when learning that Youtube is not going to do anything about the violation, is to manually file it themselves, and honestly they should state that Youtube at that point is intentionally allowing it which would perhaps pull Youtube into it as well

just because YouTube decides that they aren't going to do anything, doesn't invalidate your claim to copyright. I'm surprised that the channel hasn't seeked legal action against anyone regarding it.

My two cents on the matter is that it's likely the channel is worried that their videos aren't transformative enough fair use wise and that they themselves may get into legal troubles if they attempted to. A lot of commentary artists stay borderline on fair-use and not fair use, however if this was not the case, they have a pretty decent chance of winning that suit.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 2 weeks ago

this would essentially kill my method of viewing videos on the platform, this isn't a boost to interaction they think it will be, it will ultimately result in me watching less videos as I won't have the ability to decipher trash from good, so I'll just stick with content creators that I am used to and no longer branch out like I currently do.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

"haha I hit x object with a hammer y times, this is the result"

I've never understood these videos, phones were never built to survive these niche cases. Just a waste of material and a device.

it's the "I threw my money in the fire" video, without the risk of being charged a federal crime.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago

Class members who make a payment selection by the response deadline will receive $20 for each relevant device they own. If there is more than $50,000 remaining in the settlement fund after all payments have been issued, class members may receive up to $50 per covered device.

that's not that bad tbh, I got 34$ from a Sony class action based off privacy data, didn't have to do anything but say yes I was effected

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

This is actually an optional thing, by default it will but it can be configured to be stripped, generally not a recommended thing though because it means that whenever you want to change the iteration count or the you need to force a password reset on every existing user

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago

I'm willing to give him a pass on that one since they're probably worried that their General audience will understand the word encrypted but not understand the word hashed

view more: next ›