I don't see an advantage in holding Bitcoin over say, stocks, other than speculation, if for every transaction you have to choice to either identify yourself or produce tainted Bitcoin.
I had similar experiences with DT.
When taking RAW+JPG I always struggled to create an edit of the RAW in DT that is more satisfying than the out of camera JPG - and I watched quite a few videos and read a few guides, also trying to work with scene-referred workflow introduced in DT4.
I'm currently giving Capture One a shot (Express version is free for Sony users) and I'm really pleased how accessible the UI is. Applying default adjustments already gives a great starting point for further tweaking (similar or better than the OOC JPG). Recovering highlights also works way better than in DT. It just felt like the algorithms in DT are sometimes not quite on the same level.
Well, I didn't mean that Canon products are particularly bad in quality.
I own a perfectly functioning 40D from 2007 myself, which I replaced by a Sony A7III just recently, as I hate the fact, that Canon tries to force their customers to buy their own expensive RF lenses.
Of course cameras are impressive pieces of technology. Still I understand the sentiment of the above commenter.
My last comment was an overstatement, still there is a substantial chance of a hardware failure.
I gave Darktable a try (never used Lightroom), and as an amateur, it is still kind of hard for me to achieve something better than the "out of camera" JPGs when post-processing RAW photos from my rather old Canon DSLR camera.
I don't want to do elaborate stuff like working with masks / applying filters to sections of the photo only.
Only thing I usually do is increase saturation, and, rarely, brightness/aperture. Saturation is maxed in OOC-JPGs anyways leading to clipping if it's increased more for the overall image.
And what I almost forgot, lense correction and rotating towards drawable vertical or horizontal lines are great features.
So what it does for me is basically barely noticably adjusting the saturation/contrast values, fixing the horizon and applying lense correction.
I'm also speaking of e.g. the junkware running on automotive headunits.
These systems are expected to be shut down at least once a day, so overall focus on (not only long-term) stability is really low.
Even with perfect hardware you will still have to reboot due to software instability. Lots of software isn't even tested to run for weeks/months/years.
Here in Germany the rights of ISP users are supposedly better protected than in other jurisdictions.
At least that's what I heard on this podcast [0], latest episode iirc.
What are people using VPNs for mostly, if they're living in a country without internet censorship?
It's either your ISP or the VPN provider, which can log the websites you have visited, so there isn't a clear advantage of using a VPN.
Sure the VPN provider may claim to log nothing, but that's hard to confirm and not proven to be true in some cases (related thread regarding Protonmail: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28443449).
For researching confidential topics, TOR appears to be fine.
VPN may have better network bandwidth, or may be blocked from less websites than TOR exit nodes I guess.
So for each of the affected projects, there may be wallets that forged an arbitrary amount of currency using the exploit, which cannot be confirmed by an audit of the blockchain due to its private nature?
Inadequate use of FSM is what scares me a lot, especially in embedded development.
The current state in software should be the result of sensory information whenever possible. Or at least state consolidations based on sensory information has to be thought through rigorously. Is there any literature on the topic?