I know it's been a few hours, but if you see this, look at the Discord PTB and Canary builds. I run all three (std) so I can keep a number of prime channels open. Hope that helps.
If it is true it would buy ad servers greater obfuscation since blockers were relying on CNAME metadata to differentiate between safe and unsafe targets. If more reverse lookup and secondary metadata and vhost dereferencing is required it will complicate performant ad stripping at a minimum.
>When you opt out of facial recognition on Facebook, the company will delete your template, meaning it will have no original reference point for your face and therefore cannot find your face at all.
The details are pretty sparse. It would be nice if they clarified how they manage black-listing your template ID somewhere but still disconnect it from your profile. If you opt-ed back in at some point, they need to know to remove you from that black-list, which might imply there's still some sort of connection from your profile to a template ID or maybe the generic template still exists but they're disallowed to associate it to a profile and it's in some shadow table?
Plus, just as another layer of "I don't trust this". I have to re-unsubscribe from AT&T's job search newsletter every few months because of what I assume is a new wave of recruitment emails being sent from an older mailing list. Doesn't matter how many times I unsubscribe, that backup will always have my information on it and that service only refers to that backup.
My only assumption is that Facebook is too big to properly manage that piece of specific knowledge and will delete it, but I'll still be there somewhere. Or I'll magically opt back in because of something like Messenger or whatever. Considering the news about Google circumventing their own GDPR restrictions, I just assume these companies aren't following through with any of their promises.
> I have to re-unsubscribe from AT&T's job search newsletter every few months because of what I assume is a new wave of recruitment emails being sent from an older mailing list. Doesn't matter how many times I unsubscribe, that backup will always have my information on it and that service only refers to that backup.
That sounds like a violation of the CAN-SPAM act, and you could consider suing them.
Yes, but the hassle of deleting their email once every few months isn't enough to make suing them worth it. Plus, that doesn't really resolve the issue that requesting to be take off things doesn't actually remove me (the original concern of these comments)
Only if your looking for a USB-C to USB-A hub. There is a surprising lack of good USB-C multi-port hubs, let alone any that support USB PD on anything but the upstream port. You're just now starting to see any that even have generic pass-through of PD.
It is surprising; I understand the difficulty in making a USB-C multi-port hub, but it seems like a huge missed market opportunity. The MacBook is far from the only device with only a single USB-C port and a headphone jack.
I think the title needs to be fixed, it's a tad sensationalist. The Google Groups message is just "Container Linux project update" and is dated May 18th. Since then, there has been more clarification [0], [1], [2], that really calls out a rationalization of the RH roadmap and where CoreOS fits. It might be fair to say that RH doesnt plan to support "CoreOS Container Linux" in exactly the fashion prior to acquisition, but it would be disingenuous to imply it is being wholly discontinued.
