The sliced eggs go alongside other toppings; none of the toppings requires a lot of cooking time, so the eggs won’t get overcooked.

This is a twist on a common local (Brazil) pizza flavour, pizza à portuguesa (lit. “pizza alla Portuguese”):

Except I’m subbing tomatoes for mushrooms.

Wow, this looks delicious - and I have all ingredients in my kitchen+front yard! I’m probably trying it this week, barbecued, as soon as I get a non-rainy day. Thank you for sharing this!

I checked the recipe, and it looks really good! A bit on the laborious side, but it could worse. (Worse as in “cleaning sardines from their scales and guts at home, so you can grill them, for five people”.)

From the questions you often ask here, it seems you really enjoy movies - I hope you two have fun!

Thanks!

Tuesday I’m going to bake myself a pizza. I’m planning olives, ham, bell peppers, boiled eggs, mushrooms, onion, basil for toppings.

It isn’t just for me (my mum asked pizza Saturday, but a bit too late for dinner), but I feel like treating myself. Ah, I’m almost certainly buying some wine to drink alongside it.

I hope so, too. Their current situation isn’t currently the best (a lot of them went away in the late 10s, simply because people were using them less); I’m kind of hoping to see a revival, but that’s at the mercy of the STF, so I can’t completely rule out that the situation will evolve exactly like in the UK. It’s “let’s wait and see”, you know?

I’m also wondering the impact of that on chatrooms, that used to be extremely popular here.

When something similar happened in the UK, it was pretty much exclusively smaller/niche forums, run by volunteers and donations, that went offline.

[Warning, IANAL] I am really not sure if the experience is transposable for two reasons:

1. UK follows Saxon tribal law, while Brazil follows Roman civil law. I am not sure but I believe the former requires both sides to dig up precedents, and that puts a heavier burden on the smaller side of a legal litigation. While in the later, if you show “ackshyually in that older case the defendant was deemed guilty”, all the judge will say is “so? What is written is what matters; if the defendant violated the law or not.”.
2. The Americas in general are notorious for sloppy law enforcement. Specially Brazil. Doubly so when both parties are random nobodies.

So there’s still a huge room for smaller forums to survive, or even thrive. It all depends on how the STF enforces it. For example it might take into account that a team of volunteers has less liability because their ability to remove random junk from the internet is lower than some megacorpo from the middle of nowhere.

Additionally, it might be possible the legislative screeches at the judiciary, and releases some additional law that does practically the same as that article 19, except it doesn’t leave room for the judiciary to claim it’s unconstitutional. Because, like, as I said the judiciary is a bit too powerful, but the other powers still can fight back, specially the legislative.

For context:

There’s an older law called Marco Civil da Internet (roughly “internet civil framework”), from 2014. The Article 19 of that law boils down to “if a third party posts content that violates the law in an internet service, the service provider isn’t legally responsible, unless there’s a specific judicial order telling it to remove it.”

So. The new law gets rid of that article, claiming it’s unconstitutional. In effect, this means service providers (mostly social media) need to proactively remove illegal content, even without judicial order.

I kind of like the direction this is going, but it raises three concerns:

1. False positives becoming more common.
2. The burden will be considerably bigger for smaller platforms than bigger ones.
3. It gives the STF yet another tool for vendetta. The judiciary is already a bit too strong in comparison with the other two powers, and this decision only feeds the beast further.

On a lighter side, regardless of #2, I predict a lower impact in the Fediverse than in centralised social media.

In the same style of your husky: when my cat is too hot she still sleeps almost completely covered - except the paws and tail. It’s hilariously cute. Pic related:

The stick in question is off-site; it sees the PC once per month, then it gets back to the drawer in another room. And regardless of its fate, if I had a flood or fire affecting my PC, in the second store of a brick house, odds are that I’d have far more pressing matters than the data.

It’s mostly fluff kept for sentimental value. Worst case scenario (complete data loss) would be annoying, but I can deal with it.

That’s one of the two things the 3-2-1 rule of thumb doesn’t address - depending on the value of the data, you need more backups, or the backup might be overkill. (The other is what you’re talking with smeg about, the reliability of each storage device in question.)

I do have an internal hard disk drive (coincidentally 2TB)*; theoretically I could store a third copy of the backup there, it’s just ~15GiB of data anyway. However:

• HDDs tend to be a bit less reliable than flash memory. Specially given the stick and SSD are relatively new, but the HDD is a bit older
• since the stick is powered ~once a month (as I check if the backup needs to be updated), and I do a diff of the most important bits of the data, bit rot is not an issue
• those sticks tend to fail more from usage than from old age.
• Any failure affecting my computer as a while would affect both the HDD and the SSD, so the odds of dependent failure are not negligible.
• I tend to accumulate a lot of junk in my HDD (like 490GiB of anime and shit like this), since I use it for my home LAN

That makes the benefit of a potential new backup in the HDD fairly low, in comparison with the bother (i.e. labour and opportunity cost) of keeping yet another backup.

*I don’t recall how much I paid for it, but checking local hardware sites a new one would be 475 reals. Or roughly 75 euros… meh, if buying a new HDD might as well use it to increase my LAN.

No, it’s really not.

It is enough for my use case, considering the likelihood of my SSD and the USB stick going kaboom in the span of a single month is next to zero; if only one of them does it, I can use the other to recover the data to a third medium.

I mean just about anyone of sufficient size is susceptible to this.

Sure - the bigger the business, the more expendable each user/customer is. And Microsoft is really huge.

Just keep multiple backups.

Two are enough for most people (the 3-2-1 rule); sometimes one. The catch is that at least one of those backups must be off-line, and in a different medium than the original. While you can use the cloud to increase the reliability of the whole system, you should never rely exclusively on it.

Reminder “the cloud” is someone else’s computer. If you’re going to use it at least make sure the “someone else” isn’t a clown hat like Microsoft.

(This article also prompted me to update the backup of my personal files. I’m not following the 3-2-1 rule; a USB stick is enough. I do like to keep it updated though.)

The site works fine for me, but the same software is available from Github if desired.

Note I’m recommending anime streaming software (instead of an Anitaku-like site) because it’s a bit less likely to be taken down.

As Kolanaki said, copyright holders killed it.

If you’re looking for alternatives give Hayase (formerly Miru) a try.

go fuck yourselves. With a rake. Sideways.

It’s completely off-topic but this reminds me good old Guarani “japiro túnare”, or roughly “go fuck a cactus”.

…hey, Reddit, japiro túnare.

As usual for Latin America, law enforcement is abysmal in Brazil, specially in matters that don’t involve violent crimes. If the amount of money is small, a police report is toilet paper; if the amount of money is big, the process might take a literal decade to go through. (That is not a bug of the system - it’s a feature against the population.)

For small amounts you’re also “encouraged” to use the pequenas causas (small litigations) system. That basically means you, a literal nobody with zero law expertise, against a team of lawyers of the corporation/mafia/business you’re suing.

So in practice the law does not benefit customers whatsoever here. At most, it’ll give corporations an easy way out, when it’s proven they’re stealing your data: “Mr. Judge, I’ll throw some money on that thing’s snout in exchange for its data. It should be enough, right?” “Okay, justice has been served. Next case.”

I’m completely opposed to that - privacy should be seen as an inalienable right, not a commodity.