> If you have an American Express or Discover card you can enter your online credentials we'll load your charge names directly to check them for fraud.
Your credentials are transmitted securely and then cleared after querying. No personal information will be collected. Your card will never be charged.
Never ever ever ever do this. This is a terrible idea and if this is a legit site, they should never offer this as an option
Absolutely a scam; I've put in username 'a' and password 'b' and their page is continuously going through steps about pulling transactions from my account, checking them for fraud, etc. Maybe on step 6 now?
What's interesting here is that this is an actually pretty good idea for a startup that I'm sure many financial wellness apps or banks/credit unions might pay to hook into. I wonder if this is a legitimate site that's been hijacked?
I put in test/test as the creds and it claimed to query and start collecting the data
> Please wait while your report is being generated...
> Parsing account information
> Querying for transaction information
> Parsing transaction information
> Loading charge batch
Then I gave up waiting as my tracking blocking went crazy.
Fun game! Resizing the browser window after it starts breaks the game though. If you you resize it so the princess is off the screen, you can't lose :)
Deck is the set of cards that you bring to a match.
Library is a region of the game state: the cards that are yet-to-be-drawn. This only exists as part of the gameplay. Other gamestate regions are the battlefield, the graveyard...
Strictly speaking doesn't have to be undrawn cards given the myriad of ways you can put cards from other zones into your library, those cards may or may not have been Drawn from the library as well.
the library is your collection of cards from which you can draw and from which you do draw every turn.
It's not your entire compendium in and out of game, it's simply the deck of cards from which you (usually) draw and is distinct from your hand, graveyard and banished cards.
From the comments on the archive.org details, that archive is missing years, the original source of the scans is http://vintageapple.org/byte , and it has all of them
Can you describe what you mean by plausible deniability if in your example you can prove from any of the individual Shufflecake volumes that there's X amount of data in the others?
3-volume Shufflecake setup with on a 100 gb device. I put 10 gigabytes into #1, 20 gigabytes in #2 and so in #3, I can only store 70 gb of data before I get I/O errors, which leaks that there's 30 gigabytes of data in the other volumes.
Yes, but only if you have all three opened, i.e., you are in a "home alone scenario". Remember that Shufflecake volumes have a hierarchy, i.e. volume 1 is "less secret" than volume 2, which is "less secret" than volume 3, etc. In your example, during an interrogation, you would only open volume 1 and maybe volume 2, but not volume 3. You would see that volume 1 has 10 GB of data, volume 2 has 20 GB, and you can still write 70 GB before getting I/O errors. Nothing hints at the fact that there is a 3rd volume. Of course, in so doing, you will actually overwrite and corrupt volume 3, but this is desired behavior. That's why we recommend of always opening all volumes for the "home alone" scenario.
Another question about this, presume #1 10 gb, #2 20 gb, #3 35 gb
We have #1 and #2 open, #3 is taking 50% of the 'free space' shown. Is writing data in #1 or #2 have a roughly 50% chance of destroying data in #3 or does it known mapped blocks and the overwrite only happens once the actual free amount is used up?
There is the possibility of reducing a bit this chance at the cost of wasting more space by using error-correction, e.g. with RAID, if so desired. This is explained in the paper and in the FAQ and the README.
p2p leaks the 'metadata' of the network connections. It makes it trivial for someone to know that these two nodes are talking to each other. A goal of this, and other similar protocols, attempt to prevent that sort of metadata analysis.
there are news articles (I admit, of questionable origin) the claim he visited Russia yearly for the past decade. I do wonder if it the situation is a little more complex then he was a fugitive of the Russian Government
Further, there have been constant references, in articles from very reliable, reputable sources (see: CNN, NYT, FOX, etc.) since Russia's invasion into Ukraine about Russia's use of Telegram. I don't know that I could count the number of times I've seen phrases akin to, "based on conversations between Russian military commanders on Telegram," used as a source. The issue is that Russia's military essentially sucked at setting up their own communications channels, so they fell back to Telegram.
Valve just announced that games existence a few days ago and it's still deep in development. I'm not sure what point you are trying to make based upon its count of early play-testers?
