Having 0 documentation doesn’t mean you have no DLP strategy. That’s amateur hour.

And again, NB: this does not scale.

Tagged as ‘bad parent’

Your posting style reeks of troll behavior. I’ll be sure to interact with you less. 🥂

Top Google result.

Maybe google it before pretending you know what it does based on the name?

https://www.autoelevate.com/

Talk about something no competent IT director would do 🙄.

Autoelevate does handle this appropriately.

It automatically sends the prompt to a designated group of admin users for review. It 100% removes admin rights from end user machines.

It doesn’t automatically allow anything.

https://www.autoelevate.com/

So many people in this thread responding to text without looking into anything – talk about bad security practices.

You either: Lied about having kids

Or

Are a bad parent.

I don’t care which it is, Im just letting you know that you’ve made this much clearer than you realize.

Gross. Tell your IT director about solutions to this problem, like autoelevate or similar. I mean there’s a security tradeoff but, you can have windows prompts for admins automatically prompt an IT admin to review and enter their credentials or deny and request more info. And it’s a very easy deployment for any intermediate IT person.

Edit: autoelevate DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY ALLOW.

https://www.autoelevate.com/

Christ. I mean, bad job on the devs naming it but don’t downvote me based on a couple dumbass knee jerk responses. It does this appropriately. Lemmy sucks sometimes.

You’ve got two huh.

Hey everyone check out this parenting expert over here! They’ve raised two kids 😲

That’s basically 100% of human behavior, so yeah. Wow. Leashes? Can’t fathom a situation that would warrant it. You’re right. Everyone who has ever used a leash is correcting for a problem you’re very experienced in, and found a better way for. After all, you have two kids.

Attending their ceremonies? Dressing up in the school colors?

Yes.

In what world would nobody notice an empty crowd?

You do that by boycotting the ceremony and publicly humiliating them and their attempt at keeping their prestige.

You help them by dressing up and doing their dance.

Slam dunk lawsuit. They have a transcript. Signed by NYU. Case closed.

Why go to commencement?

They’ll still give you the degree. The ceremony is about prestige. They have none.

You want Boston to throw another tea party? They’re game.

No taxation without representation motherfucker.

I really dont get how you could be anything less than humiliated to take pride in, and belittle others, over something you have absolutely no part in.

While this 2008 bit is about Nationalism, the point is the same.

I operate on the philosophy that it is better for me to relearn things than lean on old documentation that may no longer be accurate/relevant.

The best way to implement a safe connection to my home lab today might not be the safest way tomorrow.

Old dog, new tricks, etc.

Also! Your documentation is an attackers wet dream.

NB: this philosophy doesn’t scale.

Videogames and YouTube reaction vid can both go to the same singular pair of Bluetooth headphones.

Your partner is not being fair to you. They don’t need to be listening at full volume, either. That’s obnoxious.

Shit, if I wanna plug my guitar in my huge amp and shred guitar all day, do I just tell my gf to deal with it because I’m depressed and have ADD? No, I use amp simulators and headphones.

Okay I’m free now.

Im so glad you gave me this gem.

Your response itself relies on several fallacies… false equivalence, hasty generalization, equivocation, a strawman, and non sequitur reasoning, probably more?

You’re incorrectly conflating logical fallacies (which are clear mistakes in reasoning) with inductive uncertainty or experimental limitations in science. Logical fallacies invalidate reasoning structures. Scientific reasoning explicitly includes uncertainty and error correction as fundamental principles; it’s not fallacious; it’s cautious and probabilistic.

Additionally, your example of Socrates is actually demonstrating deductive validity, a different kind of reasoning entirely. Thus, your argument misrepresents logic and science simultaneously. Please correct these fallacies if you want this conversation to proceed productively

You’re conflating two separate ideas.

A valid arguent needn’t any logical fallacy.

Edit: You’re talking about syllogisms? I think? But like that’s tangential to my point. See my new post addressing your other inaccuracies.

What an absolute bitch.

Imposes tarriffs on China. China hits back.

Doubles tarriffs. China hits back and says “fuck you, we’re done with the tattiff game. Well play the fucking world trade game. We don’t need you.”

Trump pauses tarriffs. 😳

Reduces tarriffs. 🥺

Lies about having phone call with Xi. 😅

Cancels paused tarriffs. 😬

Is now going to China, what, to beg for forgiveness? Suck Xis cock?

Honest to god, if you voted for a strongman you’re a fucking idiot. This is the most impotent pussy bullshit I have ever fucking seen. From anyone. Let alone the leader of the free world.