Sounds like you're using Bluetooth headphones and the game is attaching to the microphone which will automatically switch the audio codec from audio mode into headset mode. I'd suggest trying to completely disable the microphone of the headset so the game won't even try to attach to it.
Yep that's it! I ended up just buying a headset for gaming, since I use the other one for mostly music anyways. Solved the issue there. There were some workarounds I could try but I needed a new gaming headset anyways, the padding on my old one basically just fell apart after almost 7 years.
I live in fear of the day that will happen to mine.
I have an old Arctix RF headset, from back when they didn’t use Bluetooth and the quality was actually good. I’ve yet to find anything equivalent being produced today.
Been using Cachet for quite a while before inevitably migrating to Atlassian's Statuspage.io. I'm a huge fan of self-hosting and self-managing every single thing in existence but Cachet was just such a PITA to maintain and there was just no other good alternative to Cachet that was also open source.
Happy to hear anyone's suggestions about where else to go or what else to do in regards to protecting from large-scale volumetric DDoS attacks. Pretty much every CDN provider nowadays has stacked up enough capacity to tank these kind of attacks, good luck trying to combat these yourself these days?
Somehow KiwiFarms figured it out with their own "KiwiFlare" DDOS mitigation. Unfortunately, all of the other Cloudflare-like services seem exceptionally shady, will be less reliable than Cloudflare, and probably share data with foreign intelligence services I have even less trust for than the ones Cloudflare possibly shares them with.
Unfortunately Anubis doesn't help where my pipe to the internet isn't fat enough to just eat up all the bandwidth that the attacker has available. Renting tens of terabits of capacity isn't cheap and DDoS attacks nowadays are in the scale of that. BunnyCDN's DDoS protection is unfortunately too basic to filter out anything that's ever so slightly more sophisticated. Cloudflare's flexibility in terms of custom rulesets and their global pre-trained rulesets (based on attacks they've seen in the past) is imo just unbeatable at this time.
The Bunny Shield is quite similar to the Cloudflare setup. Maybe not 100% overlap of features but unless you’re Twitter or Facebook, it’s probably enough.
I think at the very least, one should plan the ability to switch to an alternative when your main choice fails… which together with AWS and GitHub is a weekly event now.
Why do people on a technical website suggest this? It's literally the same snake oil as Cloudflare. Both have an endgame of total web DRM; they want to make sure users "aren't bots". Each time the DRM is cracked, they will increase its complexity of the "verifier". You will be running arbitrary code in your big 4 browser to ensure you're running a certified big 4 browser, with 10 trillion man hours of development, on an certified OS.
And if you do rule based blocking they just change their approach. I am constantly blocking big corps these days, barely any work with normal bad actors.
What do they even have an spider for? I never saw any actual traffic with source Facebook. I don't understand either, but it's their official IPs, their official bot headers and it behaves exactly like someone who wants my sites down.
Does it make sense? Nah, but is it part of the weird reality we live in. Looks like it
I have no way of contacting Facebook. All I can do is keep complaining on hackernews whenever the topic arrises.
Edit:// Oh and I see the same with Azure, however there I have no list of IPs to verify it's official just because it looks like it.
I think you misunderstand the flow of traffic here. The data flow, initiated by requests coming from AWS us-east-1, was Cloudflare towards AWS, not the other way around. Cloudflare can easily control where and how their egress traffic gets to the destination (as long as there are multiple paths towards the target) as well as rate limit that traffic to sane levels.
Their email makes sense, except it doesn't. As someone who considers themselves a low traffic usage customer, running hundreds of Hetzner Cloud servers - each averaging less than 10GB of data transfer, with only a few servers reaching the previously included 50-60TB/month - I’m now facing an overall increase in costs.
Not only are the per-server prices higher, but the drastic cut in included bandwidth (without a corresponding option for bandwidth pooling) means I'll be paying significantly more despite my usage being well within "low traffic" by their standards. It’s frustrating that Hetzner never introduced a bandwidth pooling option for customers where it would make sense, especially in scenarios like mine where usage is highly imbalanced across servers.
At this point, Vultr and Linode are starting to make a lot more sense, even with their more expensive traffic pricing, since both providers offer traffic pooling. This feature would have significantly softened the blow of Hetzner's pricing changes, but instead, they’re pushing costs onto loyal customers who don’t fit neatly into their new model.
In the EU under GDPR, users must be given a genuine choice, meaning they should be able to refuse consent without facing negative consequences such as being redirected or denied access to the service. Creating the illusion of choice by asking for consent and then redirecting users to another site if they decline is a violation of the principles of transparency, fairness, and freely given consent outlined in the GDPR.
