This would have been a (if not the only) good point to make in the article considering the title. But I guess this would have taken space away from ads

The headline is vert clickbaity : it does not affect VPN users (the law forbids age-gated websites from promoting VPNs as a circumvention), and the whole article is just an ad for VPNs

I had one such case recently, turned out it was due to a faulty SATA (data) cable. Once you find which drive is clicking, try plugging it with a new cable before declaring it dead.

dmesg output may contain some useful error messages. If you find errors related to I/O, block devices, SCSI or SATA, you should include them in your post

Someone registering the domain would be able to receive any email sent to any address under this domain, including password resets.

https://inti.io/p/when-privacy-expires-how-i-got-access

I’m living in Lyon, and I’m soooo happy to hear about this ! 🤩

How about putting it at the top of the article, or using the dedicated “editor’s note” button they put right below the title ?

Found it thanks

Why did they burry what’s arguably the most important piece of information at the very end though ?

I’m not seeing this editor’s note (at least on mobile). Where is it ?

Edit 2: never mind, found it

How reliable is this website ? I see clickbaity headlines from it all the time around here and the Wikipedia page is mostly empty

There are a few things I don’t like about this scoring system :

• Why is there a “Top Provider Content Share” metric if its gonna score the same as the “Top Provider User Share” every time ?
• Why is the Top Provider Content Share not higher than the user share ? For instance, emails usually have at least one sender and one recipient, making it twice as likely that at least one of them is using gmail. If an email has 10 recipients across 10 different providers, each provider has a copy of the data
• Why is ease of hosting a mail server rated so well ? How is “leveraging email hosting services” decentralized in any way ?
• Why are we using a random repo created a few hours ago by a random github user as a reference ?