@Reincarnation_2

You saw this in Chicago -- early days Chicago was largely wooden structures. After the Chicago Fire, you see a lot of stone and brick.

Nothing wrong with wood buildings, when properly constructed and maintained -- you have plenty of them from the 1700s out east. New construction is often dictated by the finances of the builder -- the cost difference of cheaper (generally wood and engineered materials) construction vs. brick or stone is substantial.

@Reincarnation_2 To give a slightly different answer (coming from a historic town) - the first European settlers in a given area would work with what they had, which was typically local wood. As the area was settled and built up, many would follow suit with that...until such time as a a fire burns out of control -- when rebuilding, the industry now exists for other materials (kilns for brickworks, quarries for stone, etc).

Right side up this time, just a little bit more dated of a photo of the homestead…

@EileenKCarpenter I was wondering- just didn’t have time (or inclination) to dig in. Thank you!

@Daft Flames…up the side of my face.

The house that goes with the yard…we’re planning to stick with the patchwork look.

@37710TT_773W35 we used to have them all the time when I was growing up…sadly, haven’t seen one in years — you’re right, they’re beautiful (albeit a bit scary until you’re used to them)

Different perspective on the backyard as the fall colors start

Changing of the seasons…as seen from the backyard

On deck for tomorrow: alemite fittings and some quality time with a grease gun.

@HawkHorton That's a good looking Swissy boy in the back :)

@Numerous_Piccolo_564 I've been preaching that for over 20 years now. IIRC, the guy that originally wrote the whitepaper that NIST used to create the password complexity requirements (and change requirements, etc.) has called it one of the greatest regrets of his life.

@BipolarArtist 1925 IHC Model S Speed Truck. All original and functional, though not my daily driver ;)

@catlynne333 I'm hopeful that there's more to it than even this. The list of documents/assets seized by the FBI was released along with the warrant (which instructed them to take any containers holding sensitive docs along with the docs themselves). Passports were not listed as an item in that list, meaning they were in one of the boxes of sensitive/classified info.

Dinner tonight: Lomito de cerdo al tamarindo y menta. Instant favorite.

#CoSoFood

@nuintari
3 (cont). Trusting the downstream network from your ISP or VPN to the target server is NOT the question (though your trusting ISP over VPN is not the best of decisions -- ISPs are frequently subject to warranted searches...VPNs rarely so). It's about protecting the user on their local untrusted network

@nuintari
3. Very few people realize that they have problematic app traffic. Very few realize what information a given app is sending over the network. All the more reason for a VPN when on an untrusted (public) network.

@nuintari
1. They don't move the goalpost for MitM attacks against SSL handshakes - they eliminate the possibility. Saying that users who would fall for those attacks don't use a VPN is a circular argument.

2. Can your location be tracked outside of IP? Certainly, which is why defense in depth is a thing. But that's a statement in FAVOR of VPNs as part of such an approach.

@nuintari pretty strong disagreement, here.

1. MitM attacks against SSL connections (or TLS 1.x connections) are simplistic -- 95% of your target base will happily click through the popup cert mismatch warning. HSTS helps, but requires that the user has been to the site previously.

2. VPNs help mask geo-location info leaks and/or blocks

3. VPNs will protect all traffic from your device...including app traffic that would otherwise be problematic.