u/Devian50

The issue is you should be able to send them a message anyways. It's seeing the username + discriminator that needs testing, which at least the stock Discord client won't allow you to easily test :(

You could be right, that user accounts are sent the same info and are just instructed by the front-end to not display it, but I'm not certain.

What you've tested is specifically for bots added to the server, the issue OP is talking about is user bots, bots basically puppeting a "human" account instead. This will be limited to what data Discord sends to human accounts, which may not include the full user list in the way you were seeing with your bot.

if I recall correctly, it explodes a few feet beyond, as the weapon is intended specifically to kill behind cover. You can see OP set range to something to the left about 40 feet away, so it sets to detonate at 41 feet

Ok, that's a good sign then. Thanks for the suggestion!

I'll definitely check it out, though hopefully it's not limited to the closest Walmart. The one near me has "grocery-lite" rather than a full grocery dept. so it's missing a significant amount of the stuff Loblaws has.

A big reason is when they're one of the only options within walking distance. It's either Loblaws or Walmart for me, otherwise grocery shopping turns into a whole day endeavor as I can't drive. I've started using Instacart, but when I only need a handful of things my options are limited...

The only issue is p2p in a very user-dense area will also suffer from cellular congestion, which internet based p2p won't alleviate like a direct local mesh network would, though I'm not sure any mainstream chat app supports that in the first place.

Hm, all of those are good as long as you got them from legit sources, as I use all of them myself. I couldn't find anything in particular about DIGI misbehaving in any way either. You said you're not on public wifi, but are you using wifi supplied by a landlord, or dormitory wifi perhaps? Any wifi network that you do not control yourself basically, could potentially cause this.

Next time you see the error, try visiting http://neverssl.com

The website purposefully does not support HTTPS and so if your internet provider or someone else in between is trying to redirect you, you might see it instead of the normal neverssl homepage. there's unfortunately no good alternative like that if it ONLY affects Google websites though, so I'm a bit at a loss without being able to dig further into your computers connection while the issue is happening. Someone else might come along with a better idea.

Do you have any unusual browser add-ons? And what internet provider do you use? Perhaps your internet provider is misbehaving.

As others mentioned, some anti-malware software use man-in-the-middle style methods to monitor web traffic, do you use any anti-malware/anti-virus software, and if so which one?

You also said it occurs only sometimes, are the times it allows you to access youtube consistent?

Are you on public wifi, or shared wifi of some sort? The issuer being different implies that something is interfering with your connection to the internet.

It could be as simple as a captive portal on a public wifi network (the "You need to sign-in to this network" prompt usually, to have you agree to terms of use) as the redirects those use require messing with your web requests, or it could be as bad as malware on your computer (though there'd be no need to intercept https if there's a virus, they'd just read the webpage from the browser after it's decrypted from https).

Just the whole thing. There should be a part listing who the issuer is for the certificate. For example, the issuer for Google/YouTube webpages should be Google Trust Services LLC, but it sounds like you're getting a different issuer.

This can be caused from employer VPN's doing man-in-the-middle attacks to inspect browsing activity (fully legal if using a company provided computer / company provided internet connection) for example.

It seems that Firefox thinks the certificate is wrong for the page, and because Google uses HSTS it doesn't allow unknown certificates once you've connected before.

If you click on "View Certificate" at the bottom of your screenshot, what does it show in the certificate details?

How do you know you're being ddos'd? If you're playing online games, sometimes they are Peer-to-peer which would expose your IP address to whoever is hosting the game, and unfortunately there's no good way to solve that problem besides not play with those people anymore.

The token is only for that login session in particular. It absolutely can be changed by changing your password.

I think they mean more that even if the museum was empty, it'd still be nice to visit due to the architecture.

I tend to not default to rebooting my own system as I'd rather try to figure out why the issue is happening in the first place, in case it's something I can spend some time and permanently remedy rather than just sweep under the rug. For support though, or total system breaking issues, reboot first always.

What arms and stand are you using for the screens? Both the sides and the one holding the tv? I've always wanted a setup like that with a TV above the rest of the desk.

That's nice, my only option at my home is Rogers or Rogers backed for anything above about 150mbps dsl. Bell chose not to run fiber to my neighborhood, but all the others around have it.

I think this will fix it instantly, and prod is already down, so what's the worst that'll happen? Prod can't go more down

You say that, but I had issues with a VM cluster killing itself so my team decided to shut down the entire rack and restart it as we were at wits end. "What more could go wrong, the cluster is already dead."

That was a mistake. As the rack was shutting down, one of the two UPS's literally exploded. Production managed to go MORE down. Never tempt the infrastructure, it'll find a way. This way was collecting moisture under the floor where the UPS wiring was due to an idiot electrician fucking up the AC unit's configuration.

I was only countering the "make all platforms directly responsible for all content on their networks" part. If you make them all directly responsible for what's on the platform, then you get paid platforms, or horribly automated protections that have a huge false-positive rate due to false-negatives being potentially devastating.

A check-box that the user selects would not help. What happens when someone doesn't check the box? If Discord is directly responsible, then they get in big trouble. If we're holding a platform directly responsible for what's posted on it, they CANNOT leave it to their users to properly flag things.

That's exactly how you get subscription based platforms. Someone needs to be paid to do that moderation. On top of that, addition of content would be significantly slower as well, due to needing a person to verify every single thing you add. You can't have the best of both worlds.

Chrome gets around it by installing in user-mode only, via AppData. You'll have to block unauthorized program execution entirely. Applocker and other solutions others have stated are the way to go.

Just don't ctrl shift c, or you'll accidentally call them...

I found if you scroll up the chat with the new reaction so the message in question goes off screen below, then back down, it'll clear the reaction notification. That behavior is pretty consistent since I discovered it, and it's a bit less annoying than the activity feed at least. I hope it helps!