That’s generally a good idea, however, there can be reasons not to do it.
The device could be infected in a way that it won’t turn on again.
You might have an isolated management network that allows you to monitor the device and traffic (naturally ripping all cables also disconnects the management network).
And whatnot. But generally I agree.
Depends. If you’re at home with a single endpoint, maybe.
But in cases like the image there’s a lot of internal traffic and you’d want to stop the malware spreading internally. There might not even be internet connection at all.
Most serious infections are able to work within isolated internal network. You can stop data breaches by cutting external traffic but if you have ransomware you might want to cut internal connections too.
You might be able to stop the ransomware from triggering on some devices. That of course depends on the type of ransomware and whether it’s triggered based on time, external command or something else.
I’m wondering what was the email usage like in the first place if you can just choose to stop sending to most people.
But to be honest, I’ve only sent handful of emails from my personal account within the same number of years.
He did say “HOPEFULLY just innocent mistakes…” Which we all should hope whether we think all allegations are true or not.
There’s different kind of “memories” when talking about metals but this is probably not related to that. What I suspect happened is cold fusion in a very clean environment without oxygen (or very low oxygen) where oxidation doesn’t happen, allowing the very very small fractures to reattach.
Yeah and preventing that from happening in space is rather complex task. Especially on parts that grind against each other causing the existing oxidized layer to wear off.
Yeah thanks for the accurate number. It wasn’t as ridiculous as I recalled. Should’ve checked it first.
Still unreasonably high (checked the Apollo post, he calculated it would be multiple times more than what average reddit user currently brings to table).
The purpose of my comment was to point out that the mentioned 10 million dollars would mean 4 million active users if it’s monthly fee.
Theoretically anyone could make their own app with the api and pay the api cost directly.
It is still based on usage so you don’t need to cough up 10 mil for starters. You ONLY need something like 10$ a month per user. Can’t recall the exact numbers anymore but the point remains.
I’d also say that if there’s no backup for It, it does not exist.
I think that’s rather odd comment. Naturally nobody wants ransomware. And there are good reasons.
Backups may exist, but do they work properly? Or are the backups encrypted too?
How old are the backups? They might be less than a day old. But less than a day might still mean a lot of extra work and financial loss.
There might be a lot of work restoring the backups. You might have a lot of different systems.
In one of the largest ransomware cases in history, Maersk worked for months to get systems back up and running and data up to date. The insurance payout for it was 1,4 billions. Which is at least indicative of the cost.
And Maersk had recent and working backups.