Im from Argentina, living in Spain, so im sorry for me english.
I will try to explain:
Back in 2013, i had a butterfly equipment…i bought one to resell in Argentina, and i did mining like few months, and i remember using a “pool” to do that.
I sold machine, forgot totally about btc, i even change my laptop many times….
2021: Im desperated for this covid problem, im inmigrant in foreign country and is really hard. So i tried to remember things…to search in my email…in my google activity…etc…etc
I found out the pool, was Bitminter, i realized was like not working, but i wrote to support and they answered to me right away, cause my hotmail adress was no longer valid !!
So they kindly attached my google account, and i logged in!
I saw just cents of btc….and i realize i had the option “pay out auto”, and i can see the transactions made to my “wallet”….but i HAVE NO IDEA WHAT WALLET I USE….even what pc i was using …. i change pc all time… is so frustrating.
some kind soul with any idea? thanks a lot !!!
Definitely more than a year ago I replaced the internal 1TB Apple SSD in my MacBook Pro (Retina, Mid 2015) with a Samsung SSD 970 EVO 2TB unit (and an adapter). Quick story, no problem so far – SMART stats say 47TB data unit reads and 27TB data unit writes.
Since a couple of days I’m seeing some sporadic failure in reading a few files. SMART “Media and Data Integrity Errors” count has increased. The problem is sporadic because if I test the file that triggered the error (e.g. by computing a MD5 from command line) I see “Device error” at first, but it then becomes ok after retrying.
Is it possible to understand how serious is it?
Imagine the case wherein a hacker failed to correctly setup his cheap VPN which caused a connection drops and ultimately led to IP-address disclosure. He made a many requests and one out of that VPN-made requests is his own IP-address.
What can be done to distinguish his IP-address from the VPN servers?
I am DM in a campaign and recently my players have reached level 3. The villain chose the curious archetype.
I'm looking at the Eye for Detail feature, which allows the villain to perform a perception check to look for hidden items, or an investigative check to uncover or decipher clues as a bonus action. At first glance, I interpret this as an extension of the "Cunning Action" function (similar to the quick hands of the thief or the master tactician of the mastermind) by giving the villain more things to do with his bonus action.
The Eye for Detail feature is definitely used in combat. Bonus Campaign Perception tests are an excellent counterattack against enemies who like to hide (which my players regularly face). The investigation is more situational, but not useless.
Outside the struggle, the action economy is not that important. If you trade on the minutes instead of seconds, it is not practical to track individual actions. On the same time scale of minutes (instead of hours), you can basically track things through individual actions.
Because of these considerations, an Inquistive Rogue can perform twice as many perceptual or investigative tests over a given period of time as any other character (provided that this is the only activity that it performs and the tests fall under the Eye for Detail Trait specifications). You can search faster to search more thoroughly in a set time frame or to search a larger area.
Of course, I don't want to follow actions round by round for a search that would take a few minutes. That would mean a stupid amount of dice and completely distort the statistics. But I was wondering whether the eye for details of the curious should still be of some use.
Would it be reasonable, in appropriate circumstances, to grant a curious villain advantage on perception and investigative tests outside of combat? Or would that be unbalanced?
"Reasonable Circumstances" are cases in which a simple search would plausibly improve the chances of success (e.g. hiding). The time frame of the activity is short enough to make an intense effort practical (but long enough not to be measured in rounds). The review relates to the activities described in Eye for Detail, and the villain does not divide his attention among others Actions on.
My reason for this is that a villain can throw twice as many checks in battle as another, so the rolling advantage is essentially the same. I think a small off-combat evidence buff that highlights the strengths of the archetype is acceptable.
I'm worried that this could be to advantageous. This greatly expands the usefulness of the feature as it can be useful outside of combat, and the benefit is a huge bonus. If this makes the archetype far more powerful than it should be, or has unintended interactions, I should be careful to give such a regular benefit. I don't have much experience with curious villains; If they are a powerful archetype, such a buff would not be required. However, if you are a weak archetype, this buff could be an asset.
Note that I do not intend to explicitly change the Eye for Detail feature. Rather, I will use my leeway as a DM to grant an advantage based solely on the implicit usefulness of the Eye for Detail function. But I want to find out whether such a decision is wise or unbalanced before setting a precedent.
On Idot.co or Investigation dot co, as I like to call it, you will find information about famous serial killers, haunted places and much more. I'll give you an insight into human nature and how some bad choices can affect the rest of your life.
You're about 8 years late …
If more people had realized that Romney was the real moderate in 2012 and did not fall for the policies of anger, division and pandering of the DNC, Trump would very likely never have become president.
If the investigation was fraudulent, anyone charged with a trial crime should be dropped. Without the investigation, mo-one would have been interviewed and they would never have spoken any falsehood to anyone.
That would let go of Stone, Flynn and Papadopoulos. If the Ukrainian "Black Dossier" had been a fake, as is now suspected, then Manafort should not have been convicted.
What was wrong with the Müller investigation? It was based on information from electronic surveillance by US intelligence agencies. This surveillance was allowed on the basis of FISA arrest warrants obtained on the basis of the Steele dossier. It is also believed that this dossier is fake.
Indeed, the head of Fusion GPS, Glenn Simpson, wrote a very similar document a few years earlier. It's almost as if it was recycled for use against Trump.
If the FISA Warrants did not have a solid legal basis, the information gathered from them cannot be used in court. Mueller knew that the steele dossier was neither reliable nor verified once he accepted the job as a special counsel.
[Politics] Open question: Who examined BIDENS? Where's the investigation report?
As I said …
About 10 investigations by HRC and no charges filed.
there are only a few options …
1. Hillary is innocent (remember, innocent until proven)
2. If she is guilty, the Republicans are too incompetent to find anything.
or 3. BOTH, she is innocent and Republicans are incompetent.