@bear@slrpnk.net

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

I find it kind of strange that people seem so hesitant about it

I simply want the Fediverse to be a proper alternative option for social media access, not just another secret nerd club. We have enough of those already. That requires not completely closing off access to the things the typical person will want to access. I want all social media to eventually be interoperable like email is, preferably on the ActivityPub standard and not whatever centralized bullshit BlueSky is trying to cook up. That is the only way we’re going to break the corporate stranglehold on social media.

Put simply, if you make people choose between our platform and the large corporate-backed platform with orders of magnitude more users, they will choose the corporate platform almost every time. And I think that’s a bad outcome for all involved.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

The only difference between Tumblr and Facebook is size. Facebook isn’t uniquely evil; it does exactly what any corporation would do at that scale. The systems that molded Facebook into what it is would also mold Tumblr or anything else into the same abomination.

I would respect principled opposition to megacorps even if I think it’s still misguided in this instance, because at least that’s overall based. But all of the discourse focuses on the specific wrongdoings of Facebook as if any other corporation wouldn’t have done exactly the same thing in their position. It feels very kneejerk.

I want to federate and use it to destroy their platform. The biggest problem with the periodic social media “migrations” that always fail is that it creates a fragmented diaspora. Take Twitter as an example. When the big migration off Twitter was supposed to happen, some went to the Fediverse, some went to Threads, some went to BlueSky.

You know what happened? After a few weeks, most of them went back to Twitter, because that was the only common place between them, where they knew they could all meet and communicate. If Twitter was forced to federate with all other platforms, it would have been snuffed out by now. But if that was even proposed, everybody would have a kneejerk reaction, because Twitter bad. Nobody is thinking of the big picture.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

You’re in for a treat, Cassette Beasts is so underrated. I played it at release and I still listen to the music regularly.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

Presumably they are going to do more than simply rebrand it.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

Most people do not care about their init system. Fewer still care about your init system. Use what you want, just quit shouting about it.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

When the corporation wars start over the remaining arable land and drinkable water, I’ll be joining the Steam Corps

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

It’s far better than it used to be. They didn’t get the reputation for no reason. There were lots of Nvidia-specific bugs that have been slowly sorted out over the years. I’m told Wayland is even in a roughly usable state now. But it takes a lot of time to regain the lost trust. Let’s see how long it takes them to support HDR, and what that support looks like.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

No they wouldn’t. They would happily work with Republicans to fund Israel. I have no idea where you got it in your head that Democrats have any sort of tendency towards contrarianism; they trip over their own feet rushing to work with the Republicans on anything they can to prove they’re “moderate” and “non-partisan”.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

If democracy didn’t exist, the right wouldn’t be trying to prevent us from voting.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

Bailing water while the hole gets bigger isn’t accomplishing anything. It’s wasting time and effort on the wrong thing to ensure the boat sinks.

This literally isn’t true. You’re supposed to bail water until the hole is fixed. You can’t just do one or the other, you have to do both in tandem.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

This is just completely ahistorical. Democrats repeatedly worked with Trump throughout his presidency. Pelosi and Schumer met with him constantly to try and broker deals. They literally bragged constantly about “crossing the aisle”, how they were “moderates”. Dems love posturing as the mature adults in the room.

In some instances, it was legitimate to work together. They supported his administration’s 2019 infrastructure plan. Trump worked with Dems instead of the GOP to get hurricane relief. Some good spending packages were passed by him working with Dems when the GOP was too disorganized.

In other cases, they should have obstructed harder but didn’t. They fast tracked many of his federal judge appointments. Some voted for his supreme court picks. They didn’t obstruct his tax cuts enough.

The idea that Democrats were impetulently obstinate with Trump for no reason is a far-right talking point, it has no basis in reality, so I’m not sure why I’m seeing supposed leftists repeating such misinfo. They weren’t obstinate enough with Trump, especially when it mattered; that’s part of the problem with Democrats! They’re far too conciliatory to the right-wing! That’s why we hate them, remember?

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

I distinctly remember Democrats opposing Trump on moving the embassy to Jerusalem. They never fought him as much as they should, but they did fight him.

Exactly, so we can’t rely on Democrats to effectively contain Trump as you suggested we might. They are not strong or reliable enough. They capitulate far too easily.

Let’s not forget this is also what lead to the rise of the DSA and the largest protest movement in American history.

What really led to the DSA growing so much was Bernie Sanders radicalizing millions with his 2016 run. Then, the squad capitalized on that energy in 2018 and onwards, leading to many DSA members being elected nationwide, which then further grew the organization through the attention they bring.

I know it’s not considered “cool” amongst leftists to admit electoralism can ever lead to positive outcomes, but them’s the breaks. None of this would have happened if not for them.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

I would bet the main reason is that KDE is way more willing to accept features and contributions outside of the typical use case than Gnome is.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

You’re the one they see every flight. Keep up the good work

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

You shouldn’t put a protector on it. If you get a normal protector, you’re basically just re-adding glare. If you get an anti-glare protector, you’re further increasing the blurriness and darkening the screen, as that’s how anti-glare works. The adhesive will also fill in the etching and reduce its effectiveness (search for “scotch tape frosted glass”, same concept), but how permanent that is has never truly been verified; presumably, a good rub with alcohol should fix that problem.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

The goal here is to make it difficult to link to things uploaded to discord from outside of discord. The malware reason is BS. If they wanted to curb malware it would be as easy as making it a nitro feature. What that doesn’t fix is all the people piggybacking on discord as a free CDN.

Discord isn’t even wrong for doing this. I just resent their dishonesty.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

The computer didn’t get it wrong; the computer did exactly what it was programmed to do. Blaming the computer implies that this can be solved by fixing the computer, that it “just wasn’t good enough yet”, when it was the humans who actually did it. It was the humans who were supposed to exercise their judgment that got it wrong. You can’t fix that from the computer.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

Why doesn’t Israel stop doing things that require other countries to intervene

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

Convincing argument, but unfortunately a cursory Google search will reveal he was right. There is very little CPU overhead. The only real consideration is a bite extra storage and RAM to store and load the redundant dependencies of the container.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

While that isn’t false, defaults carry immense weight. Also, very few have the means to host at scale like Docker Hub; if the goal is to not just repeat the same mistake later, each project would have to host their own, or perhaps band together into smaller groups. And unfortunately, being a good programmer does not make you good at devops or sysadmin work, so now we need to involve more people with those skillsets.

To be clear, I’m totally in favor of this kind of fragmentation. I’m just also realistic about what it means.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

THIS IS A RED CUBE HOUSEHOLD

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

Greyzone is an op. We need another source.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

We’re supposed to be better than them. Countering their misinfo networks by creating our own misinfo networks isn’t being better than them.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

Never trust corporations. If you’re not profitable, they will abandon you. Only trust community-driven projects with a true open source commitment.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

Proxmox is completely different from Docker. Proxmox is focused on VMs, and to a lesser extent LXC containers. If you think you will have a need to run VMs (for example, a Windows VM for a game server that doesn’t support Linux) Proxmox is great for that.

I run Docker on a dedicated VM inside Proxmox, and then I spin up other specialized VMs on the same system when needed. The Docker VM only does Docker and nothing else at all.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

Never ask ChatGPT to write code that you plan to actually use, and never take it as a source of truth. I use it to put me on a possible right path when I’m totally lost and lack the vocabulary to accurately describe what I need. Sometimes I’ll ask it for an example of how sometimes works so that I can learn it myself. It’s an incredibly useful tool, but you’re out of your damn mind if you’re just regularly copying code it spits out. You need to error check everything it does, and if you don’t know the syntax well enough to write it yourself, how the hell do you plan to reliably error check it?

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

I write a lot of fairly simple scripts in Bash and PowerShell that should be easily understood by anybody else with moderate experience in the language, but I leave a lot of obvious comments because my coworkers don’t write any code and are extremely skittish about my automations. I add them basically to quell their fears.

bear, (edited )
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

These are scripts that manage stuff on a few hundred user endpoints and a few servers. They were doing basically everything manually until I got here, and the only way I could get them on board with my slow introduction of automation is to let them see it. I have to ensure things don’t get too long, complex, or hard to explain, or they start getting nervous.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

Adding my voice to the Debian choir.

thisisartman, (edited ) to android
@thisisartman@mastodon.world avatar

The reason for Android's Notification system being better than iOS, is solely due to the ability to turn off individual aspects of an application's notifications.

Google, the poor multi-billion dollar scrappy startup that maintains Android, made a payment app that has one notification setting, "Google Pay". So all the ads, promotions, everything.

3rd party apps like PhonePe & Paytm have a better system.

How do you manage to maintain this OS?

@MishaalRahman @androidfaithful @android @android

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

It’s awesome how in the modern world we have to maintain an antagonistic relationship with the things we pay for because they constantly try to goad us into paying for more things.

bear, (edited )
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

Everybody here agrees that beheading babies is bad. Nobody is defending beheading a baby. You are shadowboxing right now. Pointing out the two following facts:

  1. Nobody is currently willing to confirm the report that babies are actually getting beheaded,
  2. It is however confirmed that Israel is responsible for the death of many babies,

Is not a defense of beheading babies. If you think it is, you are genuinely beyond help.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

If you actually believed this, you wouldn’t work. You don’t really believe it, though.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

The philosopher was correct. We should keep quoting it.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

Amoral isn’t a virtue worth upholding. We should encourage good things and discourage bad things.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

We understand that. What you don’t understand is that we’re allowed to criticize what they value.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

Wait, are you arguing with the concept that intolerance seeks to destroy tolerance?

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

Good news, you have that freedom. But everybody else has the freedom to decide not to associate with you for it.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

Why not? Public institutions are supposed to serve the public’s interests.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

I am more so arguing that in the pursuit of not tolerating the intolerant, we just end up becoming intolerant ourselves

Intolerance of intolerance is not the same thing as intolerance of tolerance. The former stops when other forms of intolerance no longer exist; the latter stops when tolerance no longer exists.

But more specifically, defining and understanding what constitutes intolerance is a non-trivial challenge that is often ignored. Oftentimes, a person or view is labelled as intolerant when it does not see itself that way. Oftentimes, the reality is more nuanced.

All we can do is give it our best try. It’s better than doing nothing at all out of fear that we can’t get everything perfectly right all the time. Intolerance definitionally seeks to destroy tolerance; thus it follows that if we do nothing, tolerance will be entirely lost.

You can see this kind of discourse online all the time. You go to a left leaning forum and find them calling the other side fascists. You go to a right leaning forum and find them calling the other side fascists as well.

The good news is that you don’t have to simply take people at their word when they say things. Humans have the unique capacity for judgement.

I’m trying to demonstrate that the paradox of tolerance isn’t actually helpful when it comes to decreasing intolerance.

I don’t agree, but even so, you haven’t proposed an alternative yet.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

I think the limit should be pretty high, but I’m fine with, as an example, people who spread abject hatred being rejected by most parts of society. I think not spreading hatred against your fellows is an integral part of the social contract.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

Yep.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

I don’t like this logic because it’s predicated on an nondescript “they” with unlimited shadowy power. It leads to unhelpful conspiratorial thinking bordering on the magical. It obfuscates the real problems we face, and if we don’t understand them, even a violent revolution to defeat it would eventually replicate the system we destroyed because we didn’t understand how it came to be in the first place.

The reason it’s hard to change the system is because the system is self-reinforcing through individuals acting in their own immediate best interests and not acting as a class, not because “they wouldn’t let you change it, they’d just [rig the elections/not let you vote/kill you with a space laser]”. But that’s a complex answer, and it’s much easier to believe in the latter and call it a day.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

I have no idea who you are talking to. Did you respond to the right comment? None of this makes sense as a response to anything I just said.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

My entire post was warning against gesturing towards a vague power controlling everything because it leads to conspiracism. One major example of that conspiracism is antisemitism. I have literally no idea how you can read my comment and come back thinking I’m arguing in favor of antisemitism. Yes, the space laser thing was a jab at the infamous “Jewish space laser” conspiracy, and I was explicitly saying avoid that kind of thinking.

The problem with our society isn’t that there’s a nonspecific ruling class directly dictating everything. There doesn’t need to be. We proletariat as a class are fractured instead of united. There’s no need to rig elections or prevent us from voting because we don’t act as a threat against power in the first place. The system amorally chugs along unimpeded as we go about our individual lives instead of acting together. Our daily compliance is what sustains it, and the system is designed to punish noncompliance automatically.

The scary truth isn’t that there’s a puppetmaster pulling our strings, it’s that there’s nobody at the wheel at all.

bear, (edited )
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

Theyre both right wing states.

… Yeah? And? One is still worse than the other. For example, one of them repeatedly invades its neighbor. And it’s still bad when one nation invades another as part of a land grab.

Conscription

Conscription should be opposed in all cases, and unfortunately both sides use them in this war.

I’m not saying they can’t, Im just saying it is going to get more people killed to further supply them.

Actually, what gets people killed is invading other nations. The fact that you have accepted that as a foregone conclusion, and therefore saving lives requires the invaded people not fighting back, speaks volumes to your perspective. I don’t accept this as a foregone conclusion. Russia should simply leave, and then people will stop dying.

Okay, but that can’t be taken in ethnically russian areas

I’m not sure what you mean by this.

and doesn’t answer the question.

It did answer the question. I said Ukraine wants to defend itself; you asked what I meant by that, and I said the Ukrainian population overwhelmingly supports the defense efforts. Hence that is what I mean when I say “Ukraine wants to defend itself”.

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

If you’re not sure what “they can’t survey the ethnically russian areas right now” means

You didn’t say “they can’t survey the ethnically russian areas right now”. You said “that”. I didn’t know what you meant by “that”. Not to mention the audacity to do this after asking what I meant by “Ukraine”. You asked me to clarify something that was ambiguous and I did. I asked you to, and you seem to be using it as an excuse to quit the conversation.

bear, (edited )
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

It’s interesting that you are digging in on this nonsensical comparison.

You said, “Save the people from themselves. They are too ignorant to have control of their bodies.” You then said “And are you really arguing people are still unaware of the dangers of smoking?” Everything I have said has been a direct attack on that line of logic and applies perfectly. We ban asbestos to protect people from buying it and hurting themselves, despite the fact that everybody is supposedly well aware of the harms. The same goes for lead paint and lead pipes; ungrounded outlets, admittedly, most people don’t actually fully understand, but the logic still largely applies. If you believe in the idea that we shouldn’t need to save people from harming their own bodies, that perfectly applies to these things as well.

If you want to go back and revise what you said to explain why it’s acceptable for society to save people from damaging their bodies with known harmful construction materials but not to save people from damaging their bodies with known harmful narcotics, then do that. Draw that distinction yourself if you think there is one instead of expecting me to read the wrinkles of your brain through the internet. You don’t get to be mad at me for arguing against the words you used, that’s all I have to go on.

So: when is it acceptable for society to save people from themselves, and when isn’t it?

bear,
@bear@slrpnk.net avatar

You’re right, I didn’t notice you were a different person.

Everything you mentioned has widespread environmental impact, particularly if people/corporations use those materials in bad faith.

There’s no greater environmental impact if a person chooses to insulate their own house with asbestos. My point still stands; draw me a clear distinction why a store can sell an individual person tobacco but not asbestos despite the fact that we know both cause long term lung damage.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • uselessserver093
  • Food
  • aaaaaaacccccccce
  • test
  • CafeMeta
  • testmag
  • MUD
  • RhythmGameZone
  • RSS
  • dabs
  • KamenRider
  • TheResearchGuardian
  • KbinCafe
  • Socialism
  • oklahoma
  • SuperSentai
  • feritale
  • All magazines