NotHereToPlayGames

I agree. But look at the userbase! The userbase here in the USA is already migrating to Red Note - which is also based in China. The USERBASE of TikTok (I have a 24yr old daughter on TikTok) couldn't even tell you who our Vice President is! Let alone "care" about political underpinnings of their "beloved" source of what they call "influencers". The USERBASE is "smart enough" to see their "feeds" as influencers, their terminology, but not smart enough to connect the dotted line between "influence" and "brain-washed censored mind-control propaganda".

I am not TikTok fan. Or Instagram or Facebook or X or *anything* classified as "social". But this "ban" is USELESS. Why? Because everybody that uses it DOES NOT CARE about "privacy rights" and don't beleive that they (the users) are being manipulated like puppets, indoctrinated, mind control, whatever label you want to give it. Most have just moved on to Red Note which I predict will become FAR more "popular" than TikTok ever was. Tell a kid not to touch the cookies because they just came out of the oven and they are hot, they WILL touch it and get burned. People on TikTok DO NOT CARE about "privacy rights". Same goes for Instagram. Same goes for Facebook. Same goes for X. You name it. We have peope here at MSFN that tend to be even on the paranoid spectrum of privacy, yet they have Insagram or Facebook or X accounts. Adults sell their souls every day and claim one thing while do another. Do we really think "teens" on TikTok are any different? They learn from us, afterall. And if "privacy" was really an issue, Facebook would have died out two decades ago.

Yes and no. You cannot restore on YOUR view of a chat that you deleted. You can UNHIDE a chat that you hid on your end. Deleting on your end does not delete from the recipient IF THEY HAVE ALREADY READ IT. Plus, your employer KEEPS ALL OF THEM, regardless of who did the sending and who did the receiving. Bottom line, coupled with your other post regarding Teams, if you went "postal", you're screwed!

Your employer/IT should completely disable your ability to log into Teams. All of the discussions within Teams are technically the property of your employer and the employee cannot request they be deleted.

I technically have not tried Win11. We don't even use it here at work and work is always the first to make sure they have the latest-and-greatest "in the name of security". My most recent experience with Linux was just a month or two ago - Linux Mint 18.1 32-bit xfce on an Acer Aspire One. Not a good benchmark though. That Acer Aspire One is a *POS* with XP, a *POS* with Win2k, and a *POS* with Linux Mint xfce. I'm very close to configuring a Linux-based CALCULATOR APP and remove the entire keyboard sans numpad and just turn the *POS* into a CALCULATOR and not an "operating system".

<excerpt> So all those high and mighty words about security, which is, by the way, often overrated, means nothing at all for the common grunt. </excerpt>

I went ahead and read from here at work. Rolling on the floor in laughter. Why? Because this only affects LINUX. I will bookmark the link for the next time that somebody (mainly an issue on other forums) tells me to ditch Windows and move to Linux. Not to be misread. I enjoy Linux as a HOBBY PROJECT. I installed Mint on my Acer Aspire One POS but the Acer Aspire One is still a POS even on Mint. Win2k faired even worse than XP. [But yeah, "off-topic".]

<del>

Fair enough. I assumed you to be the RING LEADER !!! (You, Dixel, and AstroSkipper are clearly the BENEFACTORS, but that in and of itself reveals no RING LEADER.) And I know I'm not the only one making that assumption. But again, fair enough. Thanks. I'll have to read from home (currently at work). But remember, I already tested this in v122 and the first "issue" was already debunked for v122. I'll revisit from home and see if this "issue" is any different. A bug report isn't always a bug. Sometimes it's just "dumb" people not knowing what they are talking about, lol.

Not for everyone, of course. NET SAVVY, know what to click, where to click, when to click, et cetera. I really DO NOT SUPPORT the whole ideology of somebody else (Microsft "updates", browser "patches", etc) playing the role of Nanny State all in the "guise" of 'security'.

I've never done before-and-after comparisons, but I do DISABLE Spectre/Meltdown "preventions" on my machines. And when Microsoft or Google or Apple or Mozilla or whomever else is "responsible" for 'patching' against these "vulnerabilities", I make absolute certain to NOT INSTALL THEM! "To each their own", of course. I cannot remember the name of the program that DISABLES these "preventions", but I know I run one at home to intentionally DISABLE Spectre/Meltdown "prevention".

Not sure on that (this isn't the StartAllBack thread and I do not use StartAllBack/StartIsBack (I use Classic Shell on Win10). In Win10, the list you are pointing to is one of these settings (a Windows setting, not a Start(Is|All)Back/ClassicShell setting). But how StartAllBack "reacts" when that list is empty/disabled is unknown to me.

Not on a Win11 machine at the moment but I think that's the "most recent used" list. You'd have to turn off the "most recent used" tracking. Unsure where that is in Win11.

Done. Got my 10 in. For my own reference, I need to pick up tomorrow on page 6.

I'll even start today. I may not remember to hit the daily allotment every day. But I'll start with a full allotment of likes for the day. I should be able to find that daily allotment in this thread alone. I want this to be EASY though, so please reply, reply, reply, reply. So that I can easily hit the daily allotment again tomorrow... and tomorrow... and tomorrow... "Creaps in this petty pace" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomorrow_and_tomorrow_and_tomorrow

Disappointing that you see it that way. 2016/2021 ??? This is 2025 and you and I both use a browser from 2024. Web browsers evolve MUCH FASTER than anything Darwin ever cited! Let's play a little game, shall we? I want to do everything that I can to get you to that 10k "rep". Let's you and I reply back and forth CONSTANTLY so that your "friends" can easily find their daily allotment of "likes". I want to see how fast we can get you to 10k. All of MSFN has witnessed how this little scheme got you from 2k to nearly 7k in less than a year. It would be one thing if USEFUL posts were being liked, but when *everything* is being liked no matter how *USELESS*, some days going back *YEARS*, it really does seem to me to be rather POINTLESS. But it isn't against Forum Rules. "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em." Or is the Forum Rule that we agree to our terms in a PM versus a Post. New to this Rep Farm, so I'm learning the rules as I go. It's been going on for about a year or so WITH NO END IN SIGHT. At least it feels like it's been that long. If not, then the 2k to nearly 7k is even MORE impressive. So I might as well JOIN, eh?

Not relevant than. You made it sound (intentionally mislead?) like this was a modern browser throwing that warning TODAY, not a browser from 2016 posting a bug way back in 2016. I cannot replicate this 2016 bug in a 2024 browser. So no problem, no bug, no issue. Nothing to see here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuAKnbIr6TE

What browser gave you this? I can not replicate on six different versions of Ungoogled Chromium. All on Win10 LTSB (year 2016).

Even if I try to FORCE a request, Ungoogled Chromium WILL NOT ALLOW ME TO. No DNS record, no traffic at the router, no "broadcast". I guess we can assume that was NOT THE CASE back in 2016.

Cannot replicate. Here, Ungoogled v122 redirects https://mcdonalds.fi to https://www.mcdonalds.fi with no certficate error on the www.mcdonalds.fi and no blocked attempted request. I could probably replicate if I installed a version of Ungoogled from 2016, but WHY, you are going to believe what you want to believe regardless.

That doesn't say much. We both hate hate hate Firefox. It took Firefox *25 years* to fix a "tooltip bug". Only 22 years if you count from the SECOND bug report years after the first was never fixed. Despite having "fixes" posted DOZENS of times per year during those 25 years. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40431444 https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/10/22-year-old-firefox-tooltip-bug-fixed-in-a-few-lines-offering-hope-to-us-all/ My Ungoogled Chromium v122 is not even ONE YEAR OLD, it too was last patched/fixed/upgrade in 2024. I "can" use NEWER. I'm just NOT INTERESTED in anything newer. That day will be forced upon me one of these days.

You are vulnerable to bugs discovered in 2016. You are *dense*. They cannot be knocked into. This is 2025. Not 2016. Your next post is going to cite the sixties?

You have me confused with somebody else. I do not use youtu-dot-be. I do use YOUTUBE.com. The Tampermonkey scripts that I sometimes post "do". That doesn't mean that I've ever visited a dot-be-wanna-be. I use YOUTUBE.com.

That PORTION of the patch may not have changed, along with my tt -> xx, BUT the way that the BROWSER renders HAS CHANGED. Nobody that uses Ungoogled has ever cited that notification/warning that you reference from a 2016 bug report. I have *NEVER* seen that notification/warning. **NEVER** So yeah, a 2016 citing is IRRELEVANT. If you have this notification/warning using anything *newer* than Chrome/Chromium v109 or so, please screencap it! I cannot visit the .fi link from here at work. I'll go ahead and visit AT HOME, but I would bet your-never-wrong to I'm-never-wrong that a MODERN browser does not have the same BUG that was reported in 2016!

Perhaps. But the *excuse* is that they lack "security features" such as TPM 2.0. You can blame "money" all you like. I'll sit back and equally blame "security hype".