kevincox

If you want to serve multiple resolutions and bitrates you will probably want hardware that can do transcoding. However basically any graphics card (even integrated) will be able to transcode a video stream in real-time at a decent quality.

(If you wanted you can try to pre-transcode offline, but Jellyfin doesn't support this well)

Although getting something that supports AV1 hardware decoding could be forward thinking. For now you are probably fine without it and if you are ripping DVDs you may consider just keeping the original encoding. But most likely you will start to see more AV1 files coming in the future, and having a server that can transcode AV1 to older formats easily will keep everything on your network working properly.

TOTP code is like 5 lines. The hardest part is writing the seed to disk.

Yes, but how do you configure who is allowed to edit which files in /etc/sudoers?

To be fair this may be one of the most significant feature for a major phone OS in a few years. At least they are trying something.

Out of the box no. But it would be easy to implement if you don't need very complex rules. (I don't actually know how permissions work for sudoedit.)

*to an industry who creates serious health complications that raise the costs of hospitals.

I more and more think that the only way to manage online community is via invites. There are major downsides (difficulty of bootstrapping and reduced anonymity) but it gives a way to combat this. If a significant number of the users you have invited are bots you get your invite privileges revoked (or you get banned). It creates a chain of accountability and you can ban as high as necessary to severe the corrupted branch.

For me it is actually huge. I went from 90-120 FPS to nearly 300. I must be some outlier though. I also haven't played a while so old numbers are based on memory and likely on different kernel, drivers and more. I also don't recall if I was using Vulkan before while the new build asked me if I wanted to use Vulkan (and I switched).

Maybe this will result in some really cheap hardware floating around when the whole thing goes bust.

Most trials and discoveries are already incredibly invasive. I don't really see why the mind should be treated much differently. I would rather define what is acceptable evasiveness generally than different for mind vs written down in my diary.

Also why would you do this after they are convicted beyond reasonable doubt? This should only be done when required to reach the conclusion. Just like avoiding physical searches you can just plead guilty if you don't want to be investigated.

If used properly this could actually be less invasive. Imagine a quick check of some facts that you believe with an automated machine that only returns the basic required information and you could be removed from the suspect list before other searches need to be done (like lawyers searching through your emails or personal notes).

I agree that this is a very dangerous thing to consider, and it needs to be applied very carefully. But I don't think it is in the abstract any more morally wrong than the current methods of evidence gathering that we currently do. In many ways it could potentially be less harmful to the person being investigated. However it will be impossible to know for sure until we know how exactly this technology (when it is developed) works.

This is "Testing on the Toilet" which are short flyers that are posted in bathrooms at Google. They aren't typically meant to be particularly profound, just to remind people of common code patterns that can be written more clearly or other reminders that are good to keep in mind.