

Is there a way to use symlinks instead? I’d think it would be possible, even with Docker - it would just require the torrent directory to be mounted read-only in the same location in every Docker container that had symlinks to files on it.
Is there a way to use symlinks instead? I’d think it would be possible, even with Docker - it would just require the torrent directory to be mounted read-only in the same location in every Docker container that had symlinks to files on it.
If they do the form correctly, then it’s just an extra step for you to confirm. One flow I’ve seen that would accomplish this is:
That said, if you’re regularly seeing the wrong address pop up it may be worth submitting a request to get your address added to the database they use. That process will differ depending on your location and the address verification service(s) used by the sites that are causing issues. If you’re in the US, a first step is to confirm that the USPS database has your address listed correctly, as their database is used by some downstream address verification services like “Melissa.” I believe that requires a visit to your local post office, but you may be able to fix it by calling your region’s USPS Address Management System office.
It’s more likely that this is being done to either:
Depending on setup this can be true with Jellyfin, too. I have a domain registered, use dynamic DNS, and have Traefik direct a subdomain to my Jellyfin server. My mobile clients are configured using that. My local clients use the local static IP.
If my internet goes down, my mobile clients can’t connect, even on the LAN.
Good point!
If OP is hourly, those 3 hours should be billed as work - probably under a generic HR-related category if one is available.
If OP is salaried exempt, then this would fall under “doing any work at all” (all that’s needed to be paid for the day) and if sick time is tracked by day and not by hour, then OP doesn’t need to use one. If it’s tracked hourly then OP should make sure to only use 5 sick hours (or less, depending on how long the work-related conversations took) and depending on employer policies may not need to use any sick time at all.
This also cut into the time OP could have been using to rest. It would be very reasonable for OP to need an extra day to recover, as a result.
Don’t forget to file an expense report for the co-pay. It’s a business expense that was required by company policy, as communicated by HR, and is therefore the company’s responsibility to cover.
Generally, usage of the term “gentrification” refers to the improvement of neighborhoods - or other places where people live, like apartment complexes - and, due to increased cost of living, the displacement of the people who used to live there. Displacement of less wealthy current residents when gentrification occurs is so common that it’s implied. If it weren’t, people wouldn’t have such low opinions of gentrification.
If a forest has been gentrified, therefore, then - if you interpret “gentrified” in the same way - it follows that people who have been living there have been displaced. And since those people were living in a forest - not in a cabin in a forest - they’re necessarily homeless. Since OP didn’t say that they were building houses or apartments in the forest, that would mean that the wealthier people who displaced them were also homeless.
Since the context was another commenter calling “gentrified forest” a cursed phrase, I don’t think I’m alone in thinking that.
You should look up the definition of “gentrification.” There are a ton of options that don’t suggest that the homeless people in the forest are being forced out and replaced with wealthier homeless people.
Maybe “commercialized” would be a better word choice? Alternatively, “developed” or “sanitized?”
Apparently there’s a vulnerability with sending messages with images in them and “she” might be logging people’s IP addresses through that.
If the images are hosted on your instance, this wouldn’t be relevant. If they’re links to an image hosted somewhere, this is possible, but there’d be a lot of noise and not much value. To link accounts to IPs the URLs would themselves need to be different
I checked the urls to the images in my PMs and they’re all hosted on Lemmy.
If you do not understand why this is inappropriate you are the problem.
Was it inappropriate for Elon Musk’s company to not properly secure the data of its customers? I would say so. It would therefore be appropriate for anyone harmed as a result to sue Tesla - or Elon directly - for any damages they suffered.
Further, “Whether another user actually downloaded the content that Meta made available” through torrenting “is irrelevant,” the authors alleged. “Meta ‘reproduced’ the works as soon as it made them available to other peers.”
Is there existing case law for what making something “available” means? If I say “Alright, I’ll send you this book if you want, just ask,” have I made it available? What if, when someone asks, I don’t actually send them anything?
I’m thinking outside of contexts of piracy and torrenting, to be clear - like if a software license requires you to make any changed versions available to anyone who uses the software. Can you say it’s available if your distribution platform is configured to prevent downloads?
If not, then why would it be any different when torrenting?
Meta ‘reproduced’ the works as soon as it made them available to other peers.
The argument that a copyrighted work has been reproduced when “made available,” when “made available” has such a low bar is also perplexing. If I post an ad on Craigslist for the sale of the Mona Lisa, have I reproduced it?
What if it was for a car?
I’m selling a brand new 2026 Alfa Romeo 4E, DM me your offers. I’ve now “reproduced” a car - come at me, MPAA.
OP: “Zen 5 CPU”
You: “Unpatched Zen 1 through Zen 4 CPUs are vulnerable”
You: Is it vulnerable?
???
Wasn’t the estimated delivery date much sooner when you first placed the order? Per Amazon’s stated policy, you should be eligible for refund three days after that date.
Obviously it would be preferable for you to get it even sooner, but that’s still a lot better than two months from now.
If you have an email or any record of the original estimated date, contact Amazon CS and reference that. Don’t even mention the changed delivery - that’s not your problem, as you didn’t agree to a changed delivery date; you were promised delivery three days ago and haven’t received it.
Under notes, where you said my name, did you mean “Hedgedoc?”
It doesn’t read like AI to me, but their takeaways about copyright made me think the author had read an AI summary rather than the actual source material.
They didn’t say it was a Linux problem; they said it was a mobile problem
It’s okay, the author of the article didn’t actually read (or understand) the Copyright Office’s recommendations. They are:
Based on an analysis of copyright law and policy, informed by the many thoughtful comments in response to our NOI, the Office makes the following conclusions and recommendations:
• Questions of copyrightability and AI can be resolved pursuant to existing law, without the need for legislative change.
• The use of AI tools to assist rather than stand in for human creativity does not affect the availability of copyright protection for the output.
• Copyright protects the original expression in a work created by a human author, even if the work also includes AI-generated material.
• Copyright does not extend to purely AI-generated material, or material where there is insufficient human control over the expressive elements.
• Whether human contributions to AI-generated outputs are sufficient to constitute authorship must be analyzed on a case-by-case basis.
• Based on the functioning of current generally available technology, prompts do not alone provide sufficient control.
• Human authors are entitled to copyright in their works of authorship that are perceptible in AI-generated outputs, as well as the creative selection, coordination, or arrangement of material in the outputs, or creative modifications of the outputs.
• The case has not been made for additional copyright or sui generis protection for AI- generated content.
Pretty much everything the article’s author stated is contradicted by the above.
If you have a lot of books to download, check out https://github.com/treetrum/amazon-kindle-bulk-downloader
Are you saying that NAT isn’t effectively a firewall or that a NAT firewall isn’t effectively a firewall?