1 Like
Mine was showing 8001
Maybe something got deleted exactly 24h ago
1 Like
I’m confused. Mine was the next comment which was 8001, so when I scrolled up, to his, it showed 8000.
I see. You show 8000 of 8000
Maybe I was fast fingering
I see his as 7997 now, which was 8000 for you
I hsve 2 theories
a) counting concurrent things is hard for computes
b) 3 posts got just deleted before I read your post
Whatever I found it funny.
1 Like
Well who has the actual 8000th post?
That always throws me off when I copy the link…
1 Like
Me haha.
(Obama gives Obama a medal meme)
3 Likes
Look st the url I shared. I have ID 8K that counts for me. 100 posts were deleted, so it shows 7900. This visual counter is not determined by that. Pretty sure it’d not a requirement for discourse to keeo those synced. If we all reloaded and nothing gets deleted until we scroll to 8K it will be the same.
The ID in the url and here the counter are detatched because stuff gets deleted and thus you’d have to move hundrets of urls which is really bad. So you keep the ID stable and the counter dynamic.
The counter is probably just sloppy and we could get it synced.
If position 8K was special I’d just delete old posts until I move to 8K. Or who has post 8K changes everytime someone deletes something.
2 Likes
High frequency RFID is easy to block, this video contains some ideas:
I have an RFID shielding wallet because I used to have a contactless debit card that I wanted to protect. I have yet to test how well it blocks the low frequency stuff.
I could be wrong, but sniffing contactless credit cards, was only a problem on the poorly explained or implemented version 6-8 years ago
The new stuff is all encrypted I believe, pretty sure if we could, we wouldn’t have to go thru all the hassle of walletmor or purewrist
2 Likes
There were some repeater based attacks IIRC. Newer systems monitor the “ping” between the card and the reader to protect against this.
The DESFire EV3 is one of the chips that supports this feature but I don’t think it’s used in credit cards.
Also, messing with a small implanted chip surreptitiously is significantly harder than with a card that’s sitting in a wallet.
I’m not interested in blocking RFID, that card allegedly used RFID signals to act as a jammer. I wondered if anyone had actually tested those claims.
1 Like
It won’t.
The best and simplest way to prevent an RFID card from being read it to stack it against another RFID card - preferably of a different kind, but same frequency.
It never fails to work with LF card. It also works fine with NFC cards, although in theory NFC is designed to allow collisions and work with several cards in the field. But in reality, almost no reader handles collisions properly - and if they do, the software behind it usually doesn’t either. If you’re very paranoid about readers that can handle collisions, stack your NFC card with 5 or 6 other NFC cards, so that the entire stack draws so much power that no individual card receives enough to be read properly.
1 Like
Or stick to the anti-NFC wallet. It works great and your idea of putting another LF chip there is more than enough.
1 Like