Another player who was at the table during the incident sent me this meme after the problem player in question (they had a history) left the group chat....
I always assumed that "lawful" is relative to the society one lives in/comes from. And if that's the case then the Punisher is anything but. He's living by some law, alright, but not law of others around him.
Billionaires don't "work". At least not in the sense that they get some amount of money that's in any way in relation to the value they create. They shuffle around money to do things for them and sometimes that makes them more money. Calling that "work" lessens the meaning of that word and gives them too much credit.
Have you heard of TV tropes? It's a wiki of ... well, tropes in story telling (warning: for some people following a single link to https://tvtropes.org/ means they find themselves half a day later with 32 tabs open and having read up on all kind of story tropes while having forgotten what time is).
On the one hand it will help you recognize the tropes and figure out how many of them are used in all story telling (yes, even the good ones), but on the other hand it can help appreciate that it's not the tropes or the broad strokes that make up a story, but how well it's told.
There's a reason there are so many movies/stories/plays that are just re-tellings of some Shakespear play or another: it doesn't matter that the outcome is known from the start. The journey and how well it's told is what's important.
So basically: "Oh yeah, that guy's gonna betray me. I wonder how and why exactly!"
Die Platte in meinem ersten Rechner musste auch partitioniert werden. Weil MS-DOS 3.3 meine 40 MB Festplatte nicht als eine einzige Partition ansprechen konnte... max. nur 32MB pro Partition wurden unterstützt.
But that's exactly what every other Employee and country is doing.
And he's not capable of handling the fact that someone might be standing up to him.
And I don't even mean that in a "doesn't have a business plan to handle that situation" sense either. I think that he's personally not emotionally stable enough to fully grasp what's happening.
If you want to go all philosophical about it, think about who decided what "insane" means. That was the same species. So we set arbitrary standards of sanity and then we repeatedly fail to meet them ... something something philosophy ...
Vielleicht weil die Datenlage schon lange nicht mehr das Problem ist?
Studien und Informationen haben wir schon lange. Sehr lange. Ja klar, rein technisch ist "mehr verifizierte Information zu einem wichtigen Thema" schon was gutes. Aber was wir wirklich brauchen (und zwar schon vor 10, 20, 30, ... Jahren) sind tatsächliche Veränderungen.
Sorry, aber du plapperst genau die Argumente nach, die die Konzerne gerne hören würden.
Ja, technisch gesehen hast du Recht: die Profite der Konzerne kommen fast immer letztendlich von den Privaten.
Aber da gibt's einige wichtige Details:
Nestle macht halt nicht nur Kakao (also "Luxusgüter") sondern alle möglichen Lebenmittel die oft nicht gerade "Luxus" sind, d.h. die Wahlfreiheit der Konsumenten ist schon stark eingeschränkt.
Konzerne wie Nestle investieren Unsummen in Marketing, Imagekorrektur und das "vermarkten" von Bedürfnissen. Umgekehrt ist der Einfluss auf Konzerne vom "Normalbürger" nur sehr eingeschränkt ("Morgen kauf ich keinen Kakao, das wird's ihnen zeigen!")
Gerade Nahe-Monopolisten wie Nestle können kaum noch "ein größeres Stück vom Kuchen" bekommen, weil ihnen der schon zu so einem großen Teil gehört. Daher "schaffen" sie neue Märkte, indem sie neue Produkte vermarkten die dann "unbedingt notwendig" sind. D.h. der Konzern bedient nicht nur den Bedarf, sondern erschafft ihn
Selbst wenn der Konzern "nur" ein Befriediger von Bedürfnissen wäre und absolut von den Konsumenten gesteuert würde, könnte er immer noch entscheiden ob er den Regenwald abholzt, billigest Leitungswasser kauft und als Plastikmüll überteuert wiederverkauft oder Kaffee in Müllberg-prodzierenden Kapseln vermarkted (oder halt doch in 1kg Packungen die halt weniger Gewinn machen).
Die Veränderungen scheitern zu einem sehr großen Teil daran dass die Konzerne gerne mehr Umsatz machen würden, und zwar dieses Jahr, weil der Bonus des CEO davon abhängt.
Und deshalb setzen sie halt sehr viel daran dass der Status Quo bleibt wie er ist. Veränderung ist teuer und aufwändig, das könnte ja den Jahresabschluss behindern.
Wenn man sich anschaut wie viele Abermillionen in Marketing und Lobbying gesteckt wird, dann wird das nicht von irgendwo kommen. Die großen Konzerne wissen schon längst was notwendig wäre, aber sie wissen auch dass sie das nicht zahlen wollen. Und solange das Marketing & Lobbying zusammen billiger ist als ihr eigener direkter Schaden, werden sie das so beibehalten.
Nein, Ignoranz alleine ist schon lange kein Grund mehr warum politisch nichts gemacht wird.
"Die Leute" können Nestle auch nicht aufhalten, das ist unrealistisch.
Es herrscht schlichtweg ein immenses Mächte-Ungleichverhältniss zwischen "den Leuten" und Grosskonzerne. Letztere zahlen sehr viel Geld für Meinungsmanipulation ("Marketing") und Lobbying. Selbst wenn ich mich mit ca 300.000 gleichgesinnten Leuten zusammentue die alle meiner Meinung teilen und wir kaufen keine Nestle Produkte mehr, spüren die das gar nicht. Und wenn wir versuchen Politiker weltweit zu überzeugen doch bitte kein Wasser mehr ans Nestle zu verkaufen haben wir bestenfalls vereinzelt erfolg.
Warum 300.000? Weil ca. so viele Leute arbeiten bei Nestle. Und wenn man "Demonkratie" denkt heißt dass dass "der Konzern" auf die politischen Entscheidungen maximal nur so viel Einfluss haben dürfte wie er Mitarbeiter hat (realerweise sogar weniger, weil nicht jeder Mitarbeiter jedes politisches Ziel des Unternehmens teilen muss/wird).
Das ist eine sehr berechtigte Frage und für eine ehrliche Antwort muss ich kurz innehalten und reflektieren.
Ich würd' so sagen: Ich nehme eine pragmatische, moralisch-wohl-nicht-argumentierbare Position ein:
Ich versuche speziell problematische Firmen zu vermeiden, wo es geht. Aber in manchen Bereichen ist das teils extrem schwer, bzw. mit ziemlichen Mehraufwand verbunden (wie viel Mehr-Zeit nehme ich in kauf nur um nicht die Nudeln von einem problematischen Konzern kaufe, wenn ich schon in einem spezifischen Geschäft bin?).
Manche Bereiche sind "einfach" (zumindest in dem Sinne das man wissen kann was man tun sollte) und das sind die wo ganze Wirtschaftsbereiche als ganze Probleme verursachen (sprich: die ganze Öl-Industrie).
Beispiel: ich bin bis vor wenigen Jahren noch relativ viel geflogen (größtenteils Urlaube). Inzwischen bereue ich das sehr und (wichtiger!) vermeide es. Ich bin jetzt seit 5 Jahren in kein Flugzeug mehr gestiegen und das macht vom Verbrauch sehr viel aus.
Und in anderen Bereichen bin ich schlichtweg ignorant: ich weiß nicht welche Option hier besser/schlechter wäre und wenn es keinen gezielten Impuls gibt werde ich diese Info auch nicht aktiv suchen.
"Oh no! This situation would be almost trivial if it wasn't for this one obscure handicap that we all acquired 5 sessions ago in that short in-between adventure. How will we manage to get out of this?"
Yes, but those minor traces are easy enough to remove, especially if you don't care about being "ceritified" by Google (i.e. are not planning to run the Google services).
I was answering under the assumption/the context of of "Amazon wants to release an Android-based OS that doesn't contact any of Googles services".
So, when I said "easy enough to remove" that was relative to releasing any commercial OS based on AOSP, as in: this will be one of the smallest tasks involved in this whole venture.
They will need an (at least semi-automated) way to keep up with changes from upstream and still apply their own code-changes on top of that anyway and once that is set up, a small set of 10-ish 3-line patches is not a lot of effort. For an individual getting started and trying to keep that all up to do date individually it's a bit more of an effort, granted.
The list you linked is very interesting, but I suspect that much of that isn't in AOSP, my suspicion is that at most the things up to and excluding the Updater even exist in AOSP.
A cop out or a coping mechanism. Employers steal so much from employees: time, wages, sense of purpose, sometimes even health. And most of us don't have good ways to stop them (because socienty). So stealing a bit back might actually help feeling less hopeless.
Also für mich sieht's ziemlich exakt genauso aus wie feddit.de, außer dass ein paar Menüpunkte anders heißen und es ein paar mehr gibt. Aber zum Glück ist ja eh alles vernetzt, kann jeder nehmen was ihm am besten passt.
I thought about that, but I think it's actually more error prone, because people might just be setting ?amount=32 and leaving out currency which might lead to unexpected behaviour. Implementors tend to interpret this differently and one app might take the default currency and the other might fail to accept it, and that kind of different behaviour is a common source of security issues. Having a single unified parameter that must always contain the value and currency "solves" that issue.
There's still plenty of steps that your bank app can (and will) take to verify this is as intended. Requiring the user to "parse" the URI is not scalable anyway, the app needs to present the information clearly (i.e. "Do you really want to transfer 123.45€ to IBAN abcd, you have not transferred money to this IBAN before, the IBAN indicates a bank in <country>" where the money amount is clearly highlighted).
Würde ich ja sehr bevorzugen. Dass “eigentlich der normalzustand” geld kosten soll habe ich auch noch nie verstanden. Ich habe mich eh immer gefragt, warum das nicht der standard ist. Jetzt will die EU das auch so fest setzen.
Jetzt hab ich schon zweimal gelesen "Echtzeitüberwachung soll in der EU nichts mehr kosten" und gedacht "na toll, nicht mal die Kosten werden die jetzt aufhalten ...".
That only helps when there's viable alternatives. Since pretty much all auto manufacturers do something like this it's not really a distinguishing feature.
And even if it was: how much worse/more expensive would a car need to be for you to not pick it over one that reads your text messages. And then ask the same question not for "you", but for the average consumer. Then be sad ...
Firefox-Entwicklung wechselt von Mercurial zu Git. Dies geschieht in zwei Phasen: Zuerst wird die Entwicklungsumgebung der Entwickler umgestellt, und dann wird die Backend-Infrastruktur schrittweise migriert. Die Migration soll mindestens sechs Monate dauern. Während dieser Zeit werden Bugzilla, moz-phab, Phabricator und Lando...
My question in FOSS is whether, or how the license applies, if anyone can clarify it for me. I’m not going into a legal battle, I just am having issues rectifying the licensing with my expectations....
Note that they said "not intended" and not "not allowed". you are perfectly within your right to use the program under the GPL without licensing it otherwise.
But the company would prefer if you paid for a license (and support). If you weren't allowed the use you do, they would have said as much, but they didn't.
This is a common business practice with open source software and I don't particularly think it s "wrong", but the fact that they are apparently trying to use confusion to make it look like you have to buy a license for commercial use is very icky in my opinion (but is unfortunately also very common).
I just checked it out. That licensing documentation is a mess. They say that it's released under the AGPL, but not all of it? So what they are saying is that the whole product is not actually under the AGPL. I wonder if their "freeware" part can actually be removed without major loss of functionality. Because if that's possible, then you could simply rebundle that one.
But I suspect it exists exactly to "taint" the open source nature of the product.
No, DNSSEC simply moves the trust problem around a bit, but there's no fundamentally different answer to the question of "who do I trust to verify who someone is on the internet".
The CA system is terrible, but I'm not aware of any system thats a.) technically "better" by some relevant measure and b.) still sufficiently convenient (a technically perfect system that no one can use correctly is still pointless).
There's several steps to make the CA system less terrible with things like certificate transparency logs, but those really only help to find out if a CA was abused, not really to avoid it. It's an improvement, but it's of the "we can kick out untrustworthy/incompetent CAs after they abused their power/messed up their security" kind and not of the "this prevents abuses of CA power" kind.
What it's "really" about is something that future historians can try to figure out, but in situ it's almost impossible to tell.
We can list all kinds of factors that came together when the conflict started or which factors are around while the conflict keeps going for a long time. What it's "about"? That kind of answer only really exists in games like Civilization where the answer is "because a player wanted X" or "the PC faction AI decided that the value of war exceeded the cost" ... the real world doesn't have as neat an answer.
Beware those who are sure about the "real reason": they are either ignorant of the complexities of societies and wars or they have an agenda.
And even those future historians won't be able to pinpoint a single reason for all of this (or most other wars), because it's almost always multiple factors acting together.
Imagine for a second a war that looks like it's "clearly about the aggressor getting land/resources": that might be the main reason, but maybe historical and religious factors made the war easier to "get going" for those who don't actually care about that (or the other way around: someone powerful want's to wage a religious war, but it's easier to convince the military to fight for the resources ...).
What is right is to keep in mind that "those people" that keep the war running are not all the people that live in that area. I suspect the majority of the population don't actively wish for a full-out war (even though there might be some or even many that support the underlying goal).
Wars are often (always? maybe, I'm not a historian to be able to judge that) started and perpetuated by small powerful (and/or ruthless) groups within the areas/nations.
Yes, this particular conflict is very old and very, very messy and I can't even imagine an answer to what the least bad resolution of it would be. But keep in mind that most people that suffer under it probably don't want it.
I admit that this is a much higher number than I expected.
But there's nuance there. First, look at the date. This is about a poll in July 2014, this is very explicitly NOT about the latest, massive push by Israel.
Second, there's fluctuation in the support based on what exactly is going on (and of course based on what Hamas has done recently).
Third, the poll is only among Jewish Isrealis (which are the majority, but you're still missing about a quarter of all Isrealis in this).
Last but not least: this is a monthly poll by some think tank. I don't know anything about this specific think tank, but I'm cautious taking single polling by one organisation which may or may not have biases or an agenda as the only source of truth. Even just changes in phrasing can massively influence the results.
There's plenty of reasons why you would not want to have a Jellyfin server be publicly available (even behind authentication). It's simply not a well-secured system at this point (and may not get there for a long time, because it's not a focus).
I strongly suggest keeping it accessed via VPN.
But note that VPN access is not necessarily any slower than "publicly" serving the HTTPs directly, at least not by much.
If you don't already use Wireguard as the protocol, then maybe consider running a wireguard VPN instead, that tends to be quicker than classic OpenVPN.
And last but not least: a major restricting factor in performance of media servers from afar is the upload speed of your ISP connection, which is very often much lower than your download (100Mbit/10Mbit are common here, for example, so only 10% of the speed up than down).
Raiffeisenbank Bank International (RBI), Austria’s second-largest bank and asset finance provider across Central and Eastern Europe, has postponed its exit from the Russian market, even as it faces mounting pressure from European regulators and the US government....
Please don't give them ideas, there's enough populist politicians who would immediately follow up on that idea with disastrous results.
You are right that there's a distressing amount of "Russia-affection" in Austria, especially on the right side of the political spectrum and in some areas of the industry.
Some of that has historical roots, because due to the neutrality Austria has long been the place where the two sides of the cold war have met and had a neutral ground. While Austria has been (and is) definitely "West" aligned (whatever that vague term means), this means that there has been and is more contact to Russia than pure geography would suggest. Note that I'm not trying to "excuse" it, but just describe some of the reasons.
Der erste umweltfreundliche, vollständig digitalisierte, Cyber-gehärtete und softwaredefinierte Kampfpanzer im Baukasten-Prinzip mit Future Gun System. In bälde vollständig fernsteuerbar....
Es gibt einen guten Grund warum viele Near-Future SciFi stories sowas wie "Resourcenknappheit führte zu Kriegen und letztlich zusammenbruch der Gesellschaft" im Vorspann haben.
Es ist (vor allem wenn man "live" und nahe dabei ist) nicht immer erkennbar, aber viele Kriege laufen auf Resourcen-Beschaffung hinaus und wenn die Resourcen (wie z.B. auch Nahrung, sauberes Wasser und hochwassersichere Wohngebiete) knapper werden, werden auch diese Konflikte mehr.
We’re in the 21st century, and the vast majority of us still believe in an utterly and obviously fictional creator deity. Plenty of people, even in developed countries with decent educational systems, still believe in ghosts or magic (e.g. voodoo). And I–an atheist and a skeptic–am told I need to respect these patently...
I leave it up to everyone to interpret it, but my personal interpretation is that there probably ain't no thing such as gods, but there also ain't no such things as "justice", "mercy", "duty", "good", or "evil".
Yet I choose to believe that some acts are better than other.
I believe that helping someone achieve their goals is usually better than hurting them.
Why? Is there a "scientific fact" that makes it true? No, there isn't. Science doesn't care if earth is full of life or if it's a glassed sphere in an infinite void. Both "work" just fine for science.
So my "choice" to prefer one of those is arbitrary (scientifically speaking).
Now why is my believe in that "big lie" any more sane than other peoples believe in the "small lies"?
My belief can't be scientifically falsified (or proven).
And their belief in a benevolent sky daddy also can't be falsified or proven.
Not all "gods" thought history were all powerful, some were very limited in their powers. not all "gods" were abrahameic.
But let's pretend that a good has to be all-powerful.
Then let's posit that there is a god that has created all life on earth by making sure that he preconditions for life on earth were just right and then leaned back and just wachted.
That is powerful enough, right? and while I don't believe that this (or any other) god exists, there is no logical inconsistency here.
You have a very poor understanding of what science is. Of course it does care, because those two things are different, and the purpose of science is to collect all information there is, discern everything, catalogue all differences of all things.
If all there is a lifeless ball in space, what would science "care"? There would be no one to do science and "science" as a concept can't care.
But the fact you did so isn’t - unless you suffer from a mental illness, you were bound to choose something. That’s simply how your brain evolved.
And now we're slowly getting to the crux of the matter: just as our brain evolved to produce morality of some kind, it also evolved to make up stories (grand and small) to try to explain the world.
Some of those "stories" eventually formed into what we now call the scientific method (i.e. try to make sure your stories are verifyable and falsifiable and produce "facts".
Some of those stories were used as a social tool to develop some shared morality, to agree on which acts were good and which ones aren't.
And some of the latter category turned into religion.
Because “sanity” is a measure of how one’s brain behaves as compared to the collective of humankind - how “average” your brain is. Because morality is baked into humanity, it’s sane to make a choice regarding, say, murder being wrong or not. Believing in flying unicorn robots that sing heavy metal, on the other hand, isn’t.
Can you seriously look at human history and say with a straight face that religion (and made up stories) aren't just as "baked into" the human brain as morality is?
It's one thing to argue that a neutral, as-objective-as-possible brain should disregard religion (and I pretty much agree with that), but it's an entirely different thing to argue that "humans believing in religion is abnormal" in a historic scale ... that's just being blind to the facts.
And their belief in a benevolent sky daddy also can’t be falsified or proven.
Fallacy: Non Sequitur. Give me a description of a god, any god, and I’ll disprove them. No god can be described and exist, and a god which can’t be described might as well not exist.
Last Thursdayism or the five-minute hypothesis is one great example. They don't usually mention a god in the common phrasing, but it's easy to rephrase it to include one: "There is a god that created the universe exactly 5 minutes ago with all the signs and properties that make it look like it's a lot longer. That god created you and all your memories as well as all the uncountable cosmic radiation rays that have yet to hit earth and everything else as well. After that creation that god stopped interacting with the universe.". Go ahead and disprove it.
I'm an agnostic atheist myself, but I really don't understand the obsession of some people with "disproving god".
If there was any kind of real scientific proof of the non-existence of god, don't you think that several Nobel prices would have been given out for that by now?
Most current religions have developed to a state where the existence of their god is basically un-falsifiable, because if you can ever prove any specific thing about them wrong, then they can always just use the "gods ways are inscrutable" escape hatch.
That makes any god effectively un-falsifiable. And any theory that can't be falsified is irrelevant to the scientific method.
Theoretically, what if I named my child with a foreign but otherwise normal names
cross-posted from: hexbear.net/post/1361025...
My world shall go unused (lemmy.world)
Worse than legos (ttrpg.network)
Had this conversation with someone who chose to no longer be at my table after meeting a blind NPC (files.catbox.moe)
Another player who was at the table during the incident sent me this meme after the problem player in question (they had a history) left the group chat....
Shot for shot (startrek.website)
Next generation of billionaires collect more wealth from inheritance than from work, says UBS (www.theguardian.com)
Where's the next dungeon? (files.catbox.moe)
5399,- DM (discuss.tchncs.de)
Elon Musk calls strikes ‘insane’ as Swedish workers take on Tesla (www.theguardian.com)
KI-Gesetz: EU-Abgeordnete erwägen eingeschränkte Gesichtserkennung (www.euractiv.de) German
Warum nicht auch Kameras und KI in privaten Wohnungen, wenn wir schon dabei sind!? /s...
Oxfam-Bericht: Reiche leben viel klimaschädlicher als arme Menschen (www.tagesschau.de) German
Sound advice... that I regularly ignore. (ttrpg.network)
Amazon Building its Own Linux-Based OS to Replace Android (www.omgubuntu.co.uk)
Have you ever taken something home from a workplace without permission, to keep it? (kbin.social)
Big or small, cheap or expensive....
heise online auf Mastodon: Bilanz nach dem ersten Jahr im Fediverse (www.heise.de)
EU seeks to make 10-second instant bank payments a reality (www.euronews.com)
Echtzeitüberweisungwn sollen in der EU nichts mehr kosten. (www.tagesschau.de) German
Würde ich ja sehr bevorzugen. Dass “eigentlich der normalzustand” geld kosten soll habe ich auch noch nie verstanden. Ich habe mich eh immer gefragt, warum das nicht der standard ist. Jetzt will die EU das auch so fest setzen.
US judge rules: if you can't prove damages, car-makers can continue to intercept and record customers' mobile phone activity. (therecord.media)
Firefox-Entwicklung wechselt auf Git (groups.google.com)
Firefox-Entwicklung wechselt von Mercurial zu Git. Dies geschieht in zwei Phasen: Zuerst wird die Entwicklungsumgebung der Entwickler umgestellt, und dann wird die Backend-Infrastruktur schrittweise migriert. Die Migration soll mindestens sechs Monate dauern. Während dieser Zeit werden Bugzilla, moz-phab, Phabricator und Lando...
I finally figured out how to virtualize my OPNsense firewall. Suck it, Roku. (lemmy.one)
Blocked that hard-coded google dns garbage.
FOSS In government use
My question in FOSS is whether, or how the license applies, if anyone can clarify it for me. I’m not going into a legal battle, I just am having issues rectifying the licensing with my expectations....
Forschende warnen vor möglicher Netzüberwachung durch digitale ID (www.derstandard.de) German
Das nächste Überwachungsgesetz wegen dem wir die EU-Parlamentarier anschreiben sollten....
deleted_by_author
An end to country restrictions for streaming within the EU? (www.brusselstimes.com)
Me on my way to Mordor with a tungsten die (startrek.website)
A few Questions about reverse proxies and running your own Jellyfin server
First things first, the setup is currently up and running. but i would like to modify it to use a reverse proxy through my personal domain....
Austria's Raiffeisenbank is defying international sanctions and maintaining its foothold in Russia (www.leasinglife.com)
Raiffeisenbank Bank International (RBI), Austria’s second-largest bank and asset finance provider across Central and Eastern Europe, has postponed its exit from the Russian market, even as it faces mounting pressure from European regulators and the US government....
Aus der Kategorie "Was darf Satire?": Rheinmetalls Panther KF51 (www.rheinmetall.com) German
Der erste umweltfreundliche, vollständig digitalisierte, Cyber-gehärtete und softwaredefinierte Kampfpanzer im Baukasten-Prinzip mit Future Gun System. In bälde vollständig fernsteuerbar....
Religious and superstitious beliefs should not be respected.
We’re in the 21st century, and the vast majority of us still believe in an utterly and obviously fictional creator deity. Plenty of people, even in developed countries with decent educational systems, still believe in ghosts or magic (e.g. voodoo). And I–an atheist and a skeptic–am told I need to respect these patently...