I don’t have a ps3 controller to try, but the internet seems to say no pretty unanimously.
I don’t have a ps3 controller to try, but the internet seems to say no pretty unanimously.
“How to lobotomize your car” could become a whole new genre on youtube.
Well, you CAN actually use that 18 years old hardware with a PC. Try it on a PS5.
I can still be confident that when I buy a game for my PlayStation it’ll actually boot, I won’t need to use third-party software for controller support, and I won’t need to tinker with drivers.
Sounds like your last pc gaming experience was in the 90s.
It would be so funny if the EU decided Sony was a gatekeeper on the consoles without disc drives and forced them to allow 3rd party app store on them.
Hey, a guy can dream.
They got navy, air force … what’s gonna be the infantry?
I’m not gonna debate this here further. The fact that we obviously disagree proves my point.
Now you’re jumping from “deescalating conflicts” to isolationist goals. That’s not the same thing. However it beautifully illustrates the point of my original comment. It’s highly debatable if “isolationist goals” are a good thing he would be accused of.
(Actually) Deescalating conflicts would be a good thing, I think most would agree. He just won’t be able to, because his idea of deescalating is submitting to dictators. His interest isn’t solving anything, just blocking out the noise and taking credit.
He gets accused of wanting to deescalate conflicts, pull out of NATO, and generally refusing to uphold the constant state of war that every single US politician wants.
Just going off e.g. the stunt he pulled with moving the embassy to Jerusalem, I would say this sentence is giving him way too much benefit of the doubt.
The way see it, what he is mostly accused of is claiming to want to do those things (and most candidates would claim they wanted to “solve” e.g. the middle east conflict) but not actually having any kind of realistic idea of how to achieve any of them. Possibly besides pulling out of NATO, which, given the current state of the world, is a stretch to call this a “good thing”.
Also, when it comes to stupid pointless conflicts, I think we can rest assured that he will always be invested in them on the side he believes he can personally profit off the most. Which is an ideology too if you think about it.
Preposterous! Nobody has ever accused Donald Trump of doing a good thing.
Cable breaking from being bent in a weird way for too long.
Even in your example above, with only two letters, no numbers / special characters allowed, requiring a capital letter decreases the possibilities back to the original 676 possible passwords - not less.
No it doesn’t. It reduces the possibilities to less than the 52x52 possibilities that would exist if you allowed all possible combinations of upper and lower case letters.
You are confused because you only see the two options of enforcing or not allowing certain characters. All characters need to be allowed but none should be enforced. That maximizes the number of possible combinations.
that passwords should all require certain complexity, but without broadcasting the password requirements publicly?
No, because that’s still the same. An attacker can find out the rules by creating accounts and testing.
By adding uppercase letters (for a total of 52 characters to choose from), you get 52 * 52 = 2704 possible passwords.
You don’t add them, you enforce at least one. That eliminates all combinations without upper case letters.
So, without this rule you would indeed have the 52x52 possible passwords, but with it you have (52x52)-(26x26) possible passwords (the second bracket is all combinations of 2 lowercase letters), which is obviously less.
The only way you would decrease the number of possible passwords is if you specified that the character in a particular spot had to be uppercase
Wrong. In your example, for any given try, if you have put a lowercase letter in spot 1, you don’t need to try any lowercase in spot 2.
Any information you give the attacker eliminates possible combinations.
Which is funny because those strict rules reduce the number of combinations an attacker has to guess from, thereby reducing security.
Normal people have friends and family and would like to use social media to stay in touch with them.
Normal people stay in touch with their loved ones even if they are not on the same platform. You do not need everyday group chat noise for that.
Oh come on, that’s like “all politicians lie”. There is “I record every millisecond of your private life to sell to anybody with a fat enough wallet” evil and there is “I am raising prices this year because I can” evil. The two are not the same.
Joke’s on MS, I’m happy that it doesn’t nag me to upgrade.
I couldn’t do half of the DIY stuff that you seem to put it. Just here to say that sounds damn impressive.
I guess you travel to follow warm weather? Or how is life in winter?
Only 63%?