totallynotfbi

Maybe it was updated after your comment, but the demo site has that notice prominently at the top for me

As a frequent Discogs user, this new fee change is so infuriating. I'm sure these changes aren't as big for US or EU-based buyers, but the shipping fees I get in Singapore were very large even before this change, usually 2 or 3 times the cost of the item itself. Nowadays, there are some sellers who flat out refuse to sell items to me, specifically because of the fees. And this is just with CDs and cassettes, which have smaller shipping costs than a 12" record...

The problem is, I don't really have any choice for getting used music. eBay has limited stock and even crazier shipping rates, especially if you want a specific edition of an album. I've heard talk of some sellers moving to Etsy, but if they have, they're not showing up. And the few physical stores left here mostly carry stock in mainstream albums. So I mostly have to suck it up if I want a rare album, and pay the exorbitant costs :/

God I hope not - the prices for used records are insane. I can usually buy 2 or 3 mint CDs for the price of 1 "Very Good" (i.e full of pops and scratches) vinyl

That would be cool, if we still installed Windows from CDs and DVDs. But last time I installed Windows 10, it took 2-3 minutes to finish (excluding the OOBE prompts), so it's not very helpful...

Wow, do you need to have your apps signed by Microsoft now, like macOS's Gatekeeper makes you do?

Good to see them fix this so quickly, but what's stopping Microsoft from blocking HWID activations on a GVLK? After all, those keys would normally be activated through a KMS instead of Microsoft, so it's clearly abnormal behaviour

To expand on this, most of the developers who make these jailbreaks openly disavow their use for piracy, and focus more on homebrew applications. Since Microsoft lets you sideload any app you want in Dev Mode, there's no incentive to unlock Retail Mode, whereas other console makers have no such system and thereby get targeted more

They've been separate for more than a decade now

https://news.smu.edu.sg/sites/news.smu.edu.sg/files/smu/news_room/20230926-STHM-Opinion-B03-30x42-D.pdf

I swear, we need a version of r/savedyouaclick on Lemmy at some point.

Also, I thought this feature was already released? I've been using it for the better half of this year.

I guess, but I don't see how much they can really influence Telegram without any stake in the app itself. They only seem to have a deal for cloud-hosting with the TON Foundation, a non-critical part of the app, and even that appears to be non-exclusive. So if Tencent tries to force a bad decision onto Telegram, what's stopping them from severing ties and moving everything over to another provider?

Of course, we don't know what the situation will be like in the future, but at this present moment, I don't think Telegram's security has been breached by this. (Also I think you triple-posted this comment)

This week, TON Foundation announced that it’s forged a partnership with Tencent Cloud, which has “already successfully supported TON validators and plans to expand its services further to help meet TON’s high compute intensity and network bandwidth needs.” Validators, in web3 lingo, are participants that help authenticate transactions in a blockchain network.

It looks like the partnership with Tencent only extends to their Web3 blockchain thing, and there doesn't seem to be any partnership in the main app so it's not the end of the world - at least, for now.

Also, what even is this TON blockchain? I never knew Telegram had anything to do with crypto :/