Tetsuo

En gros non. Seuls les prud'hommes peuvent le faire.

I stopped using Signal when they dropped SMS support.

It's a great project but with very bad leadership and strategy.

They definitely had the best shot to secure communications and wasted it.

Also people regularly spend more than they can afford.

When you think about it the fact that you can quite easily borrow money you clearly will not reimburse which is kind of an infinite money Glitch for capitalism.

While I don't have stick drift or very little after 2 years with a dual sense :

The triggers are both very mushy after extended use in rocket league.

I don't share the positive feedback. The directional pad was especially terrible from the get go.

Franchement je vois mal comment quelqu'un pourrait faire croire que ce décret a été initialement fait pour le biens des français.

C'est clair que c'est du copinage, un cadeau pour des amis dans l'immobilier...

Parce que pour trouver des nouveaux logements ya une technique ancestrale qui consiste a en construire de nouveaux.

Ils ne seront pas "atypiques" mais au moins ça rendrait service a ceux qui en ont besoin... Pas les acheteurs en quête de biens atypiques...

Thanks ! That's exactly how I think it could be implemented but that confirms that this is certainly not something you can find commonly where I live.

That confirms the fact that if you use the same wifi and everyone has entered the same encryption key then there is no real client isolation...

It's cool that wifi keeps evolving. It comes a long way from the WEP beginnings.

Do you have any documentation on how this work ? Is there a name to this special protocol? Is it a recent addition to the wifi standard ?

Again a wifi AP doesn't send data to a specific client. So how does an AP can enforce that one client can't read a frame for someone else that is properly authenticated? How would an AP prevent someone spoofing mac addresses from receiving that data ?

I'm really confused by this feature I never heard of even when I was playing with aircrack and so on. Yes sometimes your mac address can get filtered but even that is not really difficult to avoid.

Sorry I have so many questions but I honestly did quite some "tinkering" with wifi years ago and none of this sounds familiar.

I like turtles.

Thank you for understanding.

I have no idea what this client separation is.

As far as I know there isn't really any client separation on wifi. It's a shared medium.

At least I don't see anything preventing you from reading someone else traffic. So anything unencrypted on a wifi is also accessible to any other clients.

I had tools more than 10 years ago that could automatically hijack session cookies on wifi for anybody connected and not using https.

Edit: I know, I shouldn't give a shit. But writing a fairly long comment to share my knowledge on this only to see it immediately downvoted without any explanation kind of sucks. So I'm removing this comment and will not interact here anymore.

IMHO everyone is entirely missing the point pointing their finger at Boeing.

The main issue is the FAA and how it failed to control Boeing. It's obvious a business will try to sacrifice safety for money. But there should be check and balances. Someone making sure a business doesn't do that.

The FAA let Boeing supervise itself.

Just to be clear some of the higher up at Boeing are criminals but so is the cop that told him he could police himself.