Th4tGuyII

Microsoft got the grift of a century. Make Win11 so bad that people will literally pay you NOT to force them onto it! /s

Seriously though, fuck Microsoft - $30 per year to roll out the occasional security update is obscene! They can go stuff themselves with their $3 trillion market cap

There's a really good article on Rentry.co for setting up Win10 LTSC. Though as you say, here's not the place for that.

Of all the things to target, did they really have to go for the IA - the organisation that literally got into trouble with the man for helping children get access to books during the pandemic.

Does this hacker kick puppies and steal sweets from babies too?

Exactly this. It's a completely arbitrary rug-pull made especially repugnant by the fact you can circumvent it quite easily with basically no loss of functionality.

While modding Win11 is a perfectly legit option for home users, it's not for businesses - as such many, many business-spec computers will be "obsolete" once security updates for Win10 end.

Best you can hope for is that these computers pour into liquidation markets giving people the chance to buy decent quality PCs for cheap - but more likely they'll become e-waste

Xitter might as well call it the "Maybes and Conditions" with how much they cherrypick their T&Cs nowadays

What?? But the FBI called dibs on that backdoor! /s

It's almost like putting backdoors into software as a whole is a bad idea cause anyone who knows of it can use it, not just "tHe GoOd GuYs"

Image manipulation has always been a thing, and there are ways to counter it...

But we already know that a shocking amount of people will simply take what they see at face value, even if it does look suspicious. The volume of AI generated misinformation online is already too damn high, without it getting more new strings in it's bow.

Governments don't seem to be anywhere near on top of keeping up with these AI developments either, so by the time the law starts accounting for all of this, the damage will be long done already.

To be fair to the developers, they do elaborate a little further in the comments:

Hey everyone, We appreciate the sudden enthusiasm for our game. When we launched it in 2015 into early access and 2016 into full, we were at the vanguard of asymmetrical games. It was exciting, but it was also our first step down the Dunning Kruger curve. QL has bugs that we cannot fix, shaky net code and overall sloppy design. We left the game up for this long so that players who had friends that wanted to play, could still get a copy. However it has been 9 years with minimal to no activity. So we felt it was right to remove it now.

I don't know enough about this game or it's community to comment much, but the devs don't seem to be bad guys - seems like a story of naive developers making a mistake, but doing their best for their community with what they had. For a niche online game with no DLCs, 9 years is hardly a bad run.

To be fair you could call this "search optimisation" and the people on Linkedin would eat this up

It's a race to the bed, as everybody knows monsters can't invade your bed, that's why so many of them live under it

At the time I got my current system, I did 1tb SSD for the main, and a 4tb HDD for data drive.

For my next system, I think I'll split that a bit more evenly, as most of my games end up on the HDD which means they a bit to load

So providing a fine-tuned model shouldn't either.

I didn't mean in terms of providing. I meant that if someone provided a base model, someone took that, built upon it, then used it for a harmful purpose - of course the person modified it should be liable, not the base provider.

It's like if someone took a version of Linux, modified it, then used that modified version for an illegal act - you wouldn't go after the person who made the unmodified version.