Sorry, I should’ve clarified: I didn’t try it with BG3 (I use the gog version) - hence my “I don’t think so”; I simply assumed it wouldn’t work because that’s the case with like 99% of steam games.
This means Larian specifically implemented their calls to the steam API in order not to exit if it fails to connect; that’s indeed pretty good and in fact I know of only one other such exception to the rule: rimworld.
I mean, I can copy Baldur’s Gate on a PC where there’s no Steam at all and play it just fine, because the game itself doesn’t have any restrictions
I don’t think so, no. You can do that with the gog version. With the steam version it’ll try to launch / connect to the local installed steam at startup, and fails if it cannot do so. You’d need to install a steam emulator like goldberg for it to work.
This is the case with most games (there are a few exceptions) on steam, even those that don’t enforce “strong” DRM. They want steam running. This is, by itself, a completely unacceptable form of DRM.
Exactly right. I keep reading this and I never know how to respond, it really isn’t that hard and it’s worth it. I’ve posted this before here but personally I go with a postfix+mariadb+dovecot+postfixadmin+spamassassin+opendkim stack; it’s extremely easy to set up (if you read the docs) and it has suited me perfectly. Once it’s configured it’s rock solid
Beyond the obvious privacy advantages, being able to generate an email alias at any time (to the point where you can create one dedicated for each shitty thing you subscribe to) is also very useful for spam protection / infinite free trials and the like. Also aliases redirecting towards many recipients for easy organizing / mailing-list-like behaviour
Yes, but that’s almost certainly you connecting to the pop3 server (usually indeed provides TLS), or the server connecting to a dedicated smarthost for delivery (sometimes does as well). But mail exchange between MTAs that don’t use smarthosts but reach the MX destination directly is mostly unencrypted, through port 25
The answer is almost universally “no”, if you didn’t encrypt it yourself and are sending a cross-domain mail
Gmail is actually relatively chill accepting stuff from self-hosted MTAs, even new ones the IP of which hasn’t established a reputation yet
Outlook is indeed rougher but none of them even come close to the awfulness that are Apple / icloud email servers
He doesn’t want profits, quite obviously you do (and seem obsessed by it), you’re the only one doing the projecting here - along with posting pitiful platitudes that’d make a shitty linked-in life coach delete their post in shame
What he did is ask you, literally, what you had in mind for the 99.99% of people that don’t win the tech innovation lottery
What the fuck is wrong with email now ?
It’s one of the only things that hasn’t been ruined those past few internet decades, only slightly improved, and is still decentralized and can still allow you to self host, don’t you touch it
A homeless person is without the mental structure to build something lasting, or else they would not be homeless or would identify differently, e.g. as a traveler.
You’re a truly disgusting ghoul
Chrome is now - and has been for a while - actively a threat towards its users (on top of being one towards the web itself). Here is a recent list of hostile moves, for example.
In terms of threat towards users Windows 10/11 is even worse, by a large margin - it actively and very aggressively spies on you.
Use firefox and switch to Linux (I suggest Debian), comrade 
While SHA1 might be considered problematic security-wise in terms of collision (using it for certs today would be very bad, for example), it is not problematic in terms of preimage attacks (even MD5 isn’t broken that way IIRC), which is what truly matters in the context of 2FA / TOTPs
As for “why not SHA256”, compatibility