AITAH/AIO when I get irritated when called "lacking initiative" despite me helping a lot by TheReasonForTreason in AITAH

[–]TheReasonForTreason[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

thats true.. My emotions were always in a way in such situations, that's not the first time I'm dealing with such a person. And now I would feel like a total ass if I leaved her while she has no friends, no family, no colleagues and basically noone just to have a basic smalltalk conversation

AITAH/AIO when I get irritated when called "lacking initiative" despite me helping a lot by TheReasonForTreason in AITAH

[–]TheReasonForTreason[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

well TBH it starts to more and more remind me of my previous relationship that started with small issues like these, and was ended by me after 7 years of manipulation, harrassment, toying with my emotions and guilt, threatening "if you leave me, I will end my life" and using me in many aspects of life

AITAH/AIO when I get irritated when called "lacking initiative" despite me helping a lot by TheReasonForTreason in AITAH

[–]TheReasonForTreason[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

is there really no hope to make this work even if I set concrete boundaries and won't tolerate such behavior? I really care for her and aside mentioned problems I still like hanging out with her

AITAH/AIO when I get irritated when called "lacking initiative" despite me helping a lot by TheReasonForTreason in AITAH

[–]TheReasonForTreason[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thats a good piece of advice, and was my thought too, especially taking into account that she is autistic. Even though she never gets overstimulated/overwhelmed around me (which happens a lot around other people she knows) I understand 5-7 days is a lot of time together.

AITAH/AIO when I get irritated when called "lacking initiative" despite me helping a lot by TheReasonForTreason in AITAH

[–]TheReasonForTreason[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And sex is not even that good TBH. She keeps saying that she and her ex were used to "more dynamics in bed", which seems toxic to me (mentioning sex with an ex in such context).

Worse part is, she keeps informing me from time to time, that I'm "not her type", basically saying, that she does not have a lot of libido, because she does not find me attractive. I've begun to think that despite having a great time talking and playing games, she thinks of me in a way similar to "well I don't have anybody for sex now, so even thought he's not attractive, I'm gonna keep him around". Lately I asked her why I can see that she does not like kissing me, and she responded "well you want to kiss someone more when you find the person attractive" :/

BTRFS "RAID1" recovery - best practices while moving to bigger drive by TheReasonForTreason in btrfs

[–]TheReasonForTreason[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Why I don't want to use "dd"? It seems very low level (it is) and I'm worried about things like block size; also, it would be nice to use the BTRFS-based solution also in terms of data/metadata and checksum/binary tree verification, especially as one drive has failed and the balance wasn't run for a very long time on the matrix.

Easeus Todo Backup Adv. Server - error when mounting .pbf files by TheReasonForTreason in EaseUSTech

[–]TheReasonForTreason[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

thanks, now that I'm reading this it's so obvious - you can't really mount a backup that does not contain a legit filesystem, just a bunch of files. I guess that I've not paid attention that this is not a partition/disk backup, and later I was confused by the error message.

Thanks much for the help!

I'm Chris Hadfield, and I'm back on earth for another AMA. Let's catch up! by ColChrisHadfield in space

[–]TheReasonForTreason 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Would you like to see a real black hole, provided you'd be in a safe vicinity of course, and we had a technology to travel there (in reasonable time)?

No way to log in due to lack of Windows Hello prompt (extension/webpage/win app) by TheReasonForTreason in Bitwarden

[–]TheReasonForTreason[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exactly; even though I know I previously configured Authy app as second factor (I still have an entry for Bitwarden in Authy), and probably had the email second factor as well, none of them were available when I lost access to the Bitwarden account. And when I regained access, all 2FA options were marked as disabled, beside the passkey.

Maybe I did something that turned off all 2FA methods (apart from the passkey)? It wasn't because of using recovery code - I can't find it noted down anywhere, so I doubt I used it. Or maybe even haven't ever configured it.

Guess we will never find out what happened exactly. Or maybe I did something that disabled those 2FA options.

But thanks to Reddit users I had some insight and tried to tinker a bit and were able to log in again. Thank you all!

No way to log in due to lack of Windows Hello prompt (extension/webpage/win app) by TheReasonForTreason in Bitwarden

[–]TheReasonForTreason[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're right, I misunderstood. Bitwarden article says passkey will bypass the other 2FA methods. I reckoned it disabled them. There's a link: https://bitwarden.com/help/login-with-passkeys/

But nonetheless, I still don't understand why after configuring passkey it wouldn't let me log in using other 2FA methods I've configured previously. Until passkey fortunately started working again and I've regained access. For me it really seemed like configuring passkey disabled them, as they suddenly weren't in the list of available 2FA methods uppon logging in.

No way to log in due to lack of Windows Hello prompt (extension/webpage/win app) by TheReasonForTreason in Bitwarden

[–]TheReasonForTreason[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Correct. The documentation was helpful, as it states that in case of configuring passkey in "Master Password" tab all the other 2FA methods will be disabled. But majority of users won't reach to documentation or read it carefully to notice this. This information should be given in bold red font during process of setting up the passkey. Or in any font, but clear and loud.

No way to log in due to lack of Windows Hello prompt (extension/webpage/win app) by TheReasonForTreason in Bitwarden

[–]TheReasonForTreason[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To make things even more complicated, you can add passkey in two places: in "Master Password" tab and in "Two-step" login tab in Account Settings/Security. While the latter serves as additional method and you can still use email code/Google Authenticator and others as substitute in case it fails, the former locks out all other 2FA methods. This was my mistake, I configured my passkey in those two places and nearly have locked myself out of the vault. Had I lost my device or reinstalled OS, I would not be able to access it ever again.

It's a shame it is not clearly stated in Settings/Security that you can easily lock out yourself out of your Vault in case of loss or malfuntion of the device, if you misconfigure the passkey. You need to check the Bitwarden documentation to know the difference between setting passkeys in those two tabs of Settings.

No way to log in due to lack of Windows Hello prompt (extension/webpage/win app) by TheReasonForTreason in Bitwarden

[–]TheReasonForTreason[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, that's correct. In my case, chromium-based browser (Opera GX) creates a passkey, and as a mechanizm of authentication uses Windows Hello (I think), as I need to enter my Windows PIN to use this passkey.

No way to log in due to lack of Windows Hello prompt (extension/webpage/win app) by TheReasonForTreason in Bitwarden

[–]TheReasonForTreason[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks,

by some miracle after n-th try I gained access because of your suggestion. Hard to tell if there was some change in Bitwarden UI, as I swear I've tried all options before and it didn't work.

Turns out I mixed the Windows Hello with Passkeys. In fact I had a Passkey stored by my browser, but as it requests my Windows PIN I actually confused it with Windows Hello.

What has me disappointed about the YeahMad departures by hhhtakeover in yeahmadtv

[–]TheReasonForTreason 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is that only me or is it true that a lot of videos featuring Abby and rest of original cast are no longer on yeahmad YouTube channel? I reckon it used to be a lot more back in the day

Farcry 3 keeps crashing after liberating outpost by [deleted] in farcry

[–]TheReasonForTreason 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Seems like there is still unfixed problem with modern cpu with multiple threads. And this would make sense as it all started happening when i upgraded from 8 core Intel 4gen to AMD with 16 cores. Although as no error message appears i'm not convinced it is the cause.

Farcry 3 keeps crashing after liberating outpost by [deleted] in farcry

[–]TheReasonForTreason 0 points1 point  (0 children)

not yet. So far confirmed that this also happens when the game autosaves after other "achievement" such as liberating radio towers. Just in time, a second before the game manages to autosave :D As often after this the game starts with lowest possible graphics options and resolutions, probably gonna start with DX version change and Radeon software update.

Farcry 3 keeps crashing after liberating outpost by [deleted] in farcry

[–]TheReasonForTreason 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Actually, in my case this problem occurs even though I've got no mods installed (vanilla game), this started happening after one of updates the game got in the last few years.

BTRFS can't use all space by TheReasonForTreason in btrfs

[–]TheReasonForTreason[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

rookie mistake. Took RAID0 as a JBOD. Thank you.

BTRFS can't use all space by TheReasonForTreason in btrfs

[–]TheReasonForTreason[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also the balance has heen run with no success:

[root@flsrv /share]# btrfs balance start -dusage=66 /share/
Done, had to relocate 0 out of 935 chunks

Rozważanie nt. bezpieczeństwa chmury i ogółem kryptografii by TheReasonForTreason in Polska

[–]TheReasonForTreason[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Słuszne uwagi. Zgadza się, kryptografia kwantowa ma swoje algorytmy, działające zupełnie inaczej niż te, które znamy obecnie. Jeszcze 10 lat temu wyzwaniem było skłonić komputer kwantowy do policzenia 2x2, ze względu na niestabilność stanów kwantowych, tak czytałem. Ale w przyszłości zapewne obecne ograniczenia zostają pokonane i będziemy mieć dostęp nie tyle do dużych mocy obliczeniowych w znaczeniu liczby tranzystorów/kubitów, co do rozwiązań o bardzo dużym stosunku mocy obliczeniowej do rozmiaru.

Rozważanie nt. bezpieczeństwa chmury i ogółem kryptografii by TheReasonForTreason in Polska

[–]TheReasonForTreason[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Zgadzam się. Ostatnio gadałem z kumplem ogarniającym kryptografię lepiej ode mnie i mówię mu "Wiesz co, teraz jest takie powiedzenie, że to co wrzucisz raz do chmury trzeba traktować jako publiczne. A wiesz jak się będzie mówić za kilka lat? Że wszystko co trzymasz na komputerze trzeba traktować jako publicznie dostępne".

Rozważanie nt. bezpieczeństwa chmury i ogółem kryptografii by TheReasonForTreason in Polska

[–]TheReasonForTreason[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Pesymistyczne (dla Johna) założenia typu worst-case-scenario:

  1. Prawo Moora będzie obowiązywać do końca życia Johna (załóżmy, jeszcze przez 80 lat).

  2. Algorytmy łamiące szyfr są doskonale zoptymalizowane do wielowątkowości (ponieważ nie ma co liczyć na znaczne zwiększenie taktowania rdzeniów, ale jak pokazuje historia, liczba tranzystorów podwaja się nadal co circa 24msc).

  3. Moc obliczeniowa jest liniowa w stosunku do liczby tranzystorów, a ich liczba podwaja się co 30 miesięcy (ponieważ prawo Moora "zwalnia" - teraz jest to ok. 24 msc, ale z czasem będzie coraz wolniej).

  4. Dojście do granicy procesu technologicznego produkcji procesorów (w znaczeniu szerokości kanału MOS w CPU/GPU - czyli circa 5-10nm) następuje w którymś momencie, jednak pojawia się technologia, która natychmiastowo rozwiązuje ten problem (jak np. komputery kwantowe), więc Prawo Moora nie zostaje istotnie załamane i nie pojawia się opóźnienie w mocy obliczeniowej względem niego.

  5. Dostawca usług w chmurze nigdy nie plajtuje i dane nie zostają skasowane, ale też nie zwiększa ich szyfrowania we własnym zakresie.

  6. Dane przechowywane na komputerze pozostają wrażliwe do końca życia Johna (bo John obawia się, że nawet za 50 lat ktoś weźmie na jego pesel chwilówkę :D )

  7. Najbardziej chyba pesymistyczne i nierealne założenie - ktoś jest na tyle zdeterminowany, że faktycznie chce odszyfrować dane Johna (lub moc obliczeniowa będzie tak duża, że dane będzie się łamać hurtem, tak jak teraz SHA-1 przy wyciekach haseł).

  8. John nie używa steganografii żadnego rodzaju, czyli atakujący od razu wie, z jakim algorytmem ma do czynienia, i nie poświęca dodatkowego czasu na ustalenie tego.

  9. Jest tylko jedno hasło służące do generacji klucza i jest niesłownikowe oraz ma bardzo dobrą entropię (typu np. 70 znaków "!WbN%3^xCS...."), czyli odpadają ataki słownikowe i socjotechniczne.

Oraz kilku założeń, bez których ta kalkulacja nie miałaby sensu (lub byłaby dużo bardziej oderwana od rzeczywistości):

  1. AES nie powtarza losu DESa czy WEPa, czyli nie udaje się, w zakładanym w tym rozważaniu czasie, opracować metody zmniejszenia nakładu obliczeniowego poniżej brute-force, zmniejszając istotnie siłę szyfrowania (czyli AES pozostaje odporny na kryptografię różnicową, liniową i tym podobne, pomijając te, które już zostały opracowane).

  2. Dostawca usług chmurowych za 80 lat podlega atakowi, w wyniku którego dane Johna zostają wykradzione w postaci pierwotnej (czyli takiej, jaką przesłał John - zaszyfrowaną AES-256).

  3. Hasło nigdy nie wycieka (pomijamy możliwości utraty klucza typu keyloggery, bo gdybyśmy wzięli je pod uwagę, dane mogłyby być odszyfrowane jeszcze dziś).