Harbinger Dark Claim

In the case of animated objects, is there any reason a Harbinger wouldn’t be able to use Dark Claim? Party members trying to claim that since animated objects are not sentient I cannot claim them.

Claim that Skype is an unconfined application able to access all one’s own personal files and system resources

Situation

I was about to install Skype on a laptop driven by Ubuntu 18.04 LTS Desktop. The software installation helper graciously informs me that Skype

is unconfined. It can access all your personal files and system resources

as per the screenshot below.

Apparently there must be reasons to make a distinction from applications that do not call for this warning.

Reality-checks

• Can Skype really scan anything I have in my home directory regardless of the permissions set to files and directories? Does it become like a sort of superuser?
• What is the meaning of system resources there? Does it go about functional resources like broadband and memory, or is that an understatement for control on all applications?

Mitigation

• How is it possible for an average “power user” to confine such an unconfined application?

Beside the mere answering, pointing out to interesting readings is also appreciated.

[ Politics ] Open Question : Now dems claim Trump has called COVID-19 a “hoax”. We HAVE the VIDEO of what the President said and he did NOT say that. Can’t they grasp…?

…what modern technology allows us to do?  – That we can analyze what he said, realize he was calling their accusations a hoax and not the virus? – Do they have any idea why we just shake our heads in utter disbelief? –People, HERE is the quote: -“Now the Democrats are politicizing the coronavirus, you know that, right? Coronavirus, they’re politicizing it. We did one of the great jobs. You say, ‘How’s President Trump doing?’ They go, ‘Oh, not good, not good.’ They have no clue. They don’t have any clue. They can’t even count their votes in Iowa.”  -“They tried the impeachment hoax. That was on a perfect conversation. They tried anything. They tried it over and over. They’d been doing it since you got in. It’s all turning. They lost. It’s all turning. Think of it. Think of it. And this is their new hoax.”

I will add photo on wikipedia without any copyright claim for \$20

by: nahidrajbd
Created: —
Category: Content & Writing
Viewed: 269

Why does Ubuntu claim to run out of space (No Space Remaining on Filesystem) when there is actually 5GB free?

I thought this could be my ~7GB swap file, but, even after deleting it, I get the same behavior. Seems like an absurdly aggressive margin of safety!

LDAPCP missing claim entity type column and group permission issue

I have used LDAPCP but when checking the configuration the column for the claim entity type is missing. also the ad group permission isn’t working even after removing the fqdn\

Hope anyone can assist me.

Analysis of an approximation claim

Consider the load balancing problem on two machines. Thus we want to distribute a set of $$n$$ jobs with processing times $$t_1,…,t_n$$ over two machines such that the makespan (maximum of the processing times of the two machines) is minimized. Professor Smart has designed an approximation algorithm Alg for this problem, and he claims that his algorithm is a $$1.05$$ approximation algorithm. We run Alg on a problem instance where the total size of all jobs is $$200$$, and Alg returns a solution whose makespan is $$120$$.

(i) Suppose that we know that all job sizes are at most $$100$$. Can we then conclude that professor Smart’s claim is false?

(ii) Same question when all job sizes are at most $$10$$.

Let’s talk about the case (i):

We know that $$\sum{t_i} = 200$$ and that $$t_i \leq 100$$. The makespan of the Algorithm $$Alg = 120$$, so $$Alg \leq 1.05 * OPT$$. We have no other information about the algorithm used. A lower bound would be $$LB = max( \frac{\sum{t_i}}{2}, max(t_i)) = max (100,100) = 100$$ so I would say for that particular instance we’d have $$120 \leq 1.05 * 100 = 105$$ which means the claim would be false.

Likewise for the case (ii).

My answer is marked as incorrect, and I am struggling to do the right analysis.

Should it be a claim, a role or a policy?

The distinction between roles and claims is that roles describe a set of users and claims describe a property of a user. So there can be a role “Administrator”, but there can also be a claim “HasElevatedPrivilegeBadge”. Both can allow the same action. Now which one should I pick if I want to allow only certain people to do certain things, for example:

CanAddItem, CanUpdateItem, CanDeleteItem, CanAddProduct, CanUpdateProduct, CanDeleteProduct 

I could create role “Administrator” and add to it claims “CanAddItem”, “CanUpdateItem”, etc., but “CanAddItem” doesn’t describe a property of a user. It says what the user can do, which is not what a claim should do, should it?

Another approach is to create policies, such as:

policy.AddPolicy("CanAddItem", policy => {     policy.RequireAuthenticatedUser()           .RequireRole("Administrator"); }); 

But for more than 20 policies, it will take a good chunk of my Startup class. Is there any other way of doing this, or is one of these the preferred one?

I’d like to point out that I’m specifically looking for a solution for .Net Core Identity. I’m asking for a solution on how to fit my requirement into Identity tables provided by the framework.

For a UK rail delay, which train company do you claim compensation from?

For those who don’t know, the UK rail network was largely privatised in the 1990s. Whether or not rail privatisation is a good thing is still very much up for debate, but even most pro-privatisation people feel the way it was done wasn’t the right way! One upshot is that most non-trivial journeys will involve travel on trains operated by more than one train company.

Let’s consider a hypothetical journey, A to D with a change of trains at C. The A-C journey is to be operated by TrainCoA, C-D by TrainCoB. Unfortunately, the A-C train is cancelled, so you end up getting a later train A-B, another B-C, and then a later train than you’d planned C-D. Oh, and then the C-D train you eventually caught was very late too. Everything was bought on a single ticket.

In this situation, which train company do claim compensation from? TrainCoA, as their initial cancellation was your first delay? TrainCoB, as their C-D delay was the largest delay on your journey? TrainCoC, who ran the A-B journey that you got instead, as they were the first company who’s trains you managed to take? Or can you take advantage of the privatised nature of the system, review the compensation policies of all three train operating companies, and apply for compensation from whichever company has the most generous compensation for your sequence of delays? (Many of the companies have different minimum delays before compensation is due, and different exclusions on what their delay compensation covers….)