Just a regular Joe.

  • 0 Posts
  • 155 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 7th, 2023

help-circle
  • You see, peace in Europe is only maintained through the ability (or illusion thereof) of russia being able to invade and otherwise exert influence over former soviet and warsaw pact states at any point in time with little resistance.

    The moment there is the credible threat of resistance, it is a clear provocation and justifies a response, possibly an invasion.

    I trust I cleared that up for you.

    edit: The sad part is, this is similar to US and Chinese policy. World and regional power politics is closer to schoolyard bully behaviour than we’d like. Vote for your favourite bully today!



  • NFSv3 (udp, stateless) was always as reliable as the network infra under Linux, I found. NFSv4 made things a bit more complicated.

    You don’t want any NAT / stateful connection tracking in the network path (anything that could hiccup and forget), and wired connections only for permanent storage mounts, of course.



  • Hah. I hadn’t seen that article / heard of the theory, but as far as crackpot theories/hypotheses go, it’s one of the more likely (edit: to come about). I doubt it’s anywhere near the majority yet, personally.

    It was already obvious that propaganda news articles (on obscure websites) had orchestrated releases and promotion on social media, in a massive circle jerk, and I assumed machine generated/assisted content was involved. Then ChatGPT hit the headlines and we all had the power.


  • Whose deepfake influencers do you “trust” more? US, China, russia and a few lesser players are already working to control the information space / spread propaganda (note: not necessarily/always lies, but there is typically a focus or spin) far and wide.

    We know people are highly influenced by propaganda (some more than others, but all of us are) and that quantity and repetition plays a role. Since this is now an established battlefield, I’d like our (western) defences to be strong.

    It has potential for abuse, certainly. That’s par for the course. There is also the potential for it to be used to debunk fake news, shock people out of false beliefs, and help reconnect people to reality. Let’s see how this plays out. popcorn time






  • The big Q: Is this to the detriment or benefit of the russian war machine?

    If the end result is a more self-sufficient russia and profits going to the war effort … would it have been the right move? Is the symbolism worth it?

    It sounds like it was a very orderly process to ensure the ongoing viability of the business.

    I’d rather see russian factories dismantled, thousands of jobs lost in russia, and significant supply chain issues. I guess that option never factored into the discussion as it would cost investors more.





  • https://opensource.stackexchange.com/questions/8367/is-the-term-open-source-a-trademark has a discussion about this.

    The short story is that the OSI failed to obtain a legal trademark in the US for the term “open source” (software), resulting in many opportunistic companies and individuals adopting the term popularized by the OSI (which was founded by Eric Raymond, Michael Tiemann and Bruce Perens).

    There was controversy at the time due to it being a business-friendly spin on the ideological “free software”, and I personally avoided using the term for many years as a result. Even without a trademark on the now generic term of Open Source, there is still value in the OSI brand and its stamp of approval on a license.

    Those who want to be crystal clear, should probably always say OSI Approved Open Source License.

    Now, I’m off to have a Nescafé Approved Coffee.