Particularly the "Number Go Up" section, which shows that the buyer also runs (and owns a majority of) a crypto token called "B20", which curiously enough, Beeple also has a 2% stake in.
In this day and age you're living on borrowed time using an old version of a web browser. This state of affairs has its good and bad, but your modern-day browser vendors don't typically maintain branches of old versions to make security and bug fixes (especially when they change things for security reasons, as with this case of old-style addons being removed). If you're going to insist on using an old unsupported version you have to accept the risk of things eventually breaking and the inconvenience of workarounds like the one you described.
You realize, I hope, that 56.0.2 is riddled with security holes at this point? I get the attachment to old addons, but 129 CVEs (including multiple severe memory corruption bugs) affect that version now. It's not really reasonable to expect Mozilla to keep maintaining it.
I've been using Hangouts on Firefox a fair bit recently. Video chats work fine, though I've noticed occasional glitches with the UI if I leave it open after the laptop goes to sleep. A reload fixes it, though.
It's a good way to preemptively color the reader's perception of your comment. Makes you seem more reasonable and knowledgeable when you seemingly recognize the controversial nature of what you're saying, even if it isn't actually that controversial at all. It's a commonly-seen tactic on reddit.
It's not GoDaddy. My SO tried to register our family name earlier (after pre-registering for it, even!) and got a similar price.
Querying the WHOIS server for the domain says the following:
"This premium domain is available for purchase. If you would like to make an offer, please contact [email protected]."
Rightside.co is the owner of the TLD. It looks like they've set aside a bunch of common family names so they can charge "premium" prices for them. So helpful of them!
Would also like to give some props to Discworld MUD, which served as both my introduction to MUDs and to the Discworld book series. Still hanging in there, and being actively developed, almost 25 years after it was founded. It sports one of the smartest command parsers I've encountered in any MUD.
We can, as long as you believe these new warnings shouldn't be taken at face value. It adds a layer of doubt to the situation that wasn't there before.
The most obvious difference is that the TrueCrypt code has had at least the first stage of a formal security audit done, which uncovered no evidence of backdoors. With BitLocker being closed source and no public audits being done, you don't have the same guarantees. BitLocker may be perfectly secure, but I feel I'm justified in saying that its status is much more uncertain.
A lot of discussions of TrueCrypt replacements I've read today miss a major point, which is that users of the Windows version are now left with no reliable, up-to-date software with an equivalent feature set and security guarantees. I know we tend to be *nix-heavy here, but some of us used TrueCrypt because it was the best solution for Windows, not because it was cross-platform.
Particularly the "Number Go Up" section, which shows that the buyer also runs (and owns a majority of) a crypto token called "B20", which curiously enough, Beeple also has a 2% stake in.