

Turns out when Zuckerbot was talking about “allowing more speech on the platform”, he just meant more slurs.
Turns out when Zuckerbot was talking about “allowing more speech on the platform”, he just meant more slurs.
How does that increase the risk compared to something like JBOD or overlayfs? In both cases you will lose data if a drive fails. Keep in mind that this is btrfs raid0, not regular raid. If anything that decreases the chance of corruption because the metadata is redundantly stored on both drives.
No mention of systemd? This is unacceptable.
A disk failure will cause you to lose data, yes. But that’s also the case in all the other solutions discussed here. Backups should be handled separately and are not part of the original question.
Have you considered simply setting btrfs to RAID 0?
“May be on shaky legal ground”
The law clearly states that Tiktok is banned and should be made inaccessible. The president cannot unilaterally change the law. They even got a lawyer to explain this to them.
Regardless of what you think of the ban, there can be no doubt about the fact that this is what the law says. No matter what Trump claims. If journalists show this level of misregard for truth and the rule of law, things are going to become much worse.
The fight for privacy and digital freedom is inherently political.
Sure, but that doesn’t fix any of the problems that this article highlights. Large areas of the globe are becoming unhabitable and yet the current policy is to keep people there through subsidies and legal threats for insurance companies instead of actual prevention and mitigation. Basically burying the head in the sand while everyone else is paying the price.
To quote the article:
If rebuilding a house destroyed in a “100 year flood” once made sense, now that there’s a “100 year flood” every five years, rebuilding in that locale no longer makes sense. So why should taxpayers absorb the costs of this selective blindness to the realities of rising global risks?
Solidarity and collectivization of risk is essential for things like healthcare, where your risk is almost entirely depending on luck. But for home disaster insurance, it depends much more kn where and how you choose to build. It then makes little sense why living in particularly dangerous areas should be subsidized. That money should rather go towards climate adaptation.
Delightfully devilish, Seymour!
The “scientific context” is literally written by a self-proclaimed god (who is totally not trolling). Do you doubt the divine scripture?
Very well said. Just wanted to clarify that the notion that men should always be strong and heroic is still toxic masculinity. Strength shouldn’t be celebrated for its own sake, what matters is how it’s used. Appreciate the men who struggle against anxiety and social expectations to still do what is right.
I know that’s probably what you mean, but that last paragraph gave me flashbacks.
Looks like the UK finally found someone willing to be transport supremo
It would be cool if he did this as a protest in solidarity with marginalized groups against an unfair rule. Except that:
He never even claimed that was his motivation.
He was underperforming during the tournament.
The dress code explicitly allows for “national or traditional dress”.
Magnus knows that’s not how the rules work. And they didn’t suddenly whack him with a disqualification, he withdrew himself after being told to change. In his own words “fine, then I’m out. Like, fuck you”
A player broke the rules, which have been consistently applied for a long time, and refused to change after his first warning. Do you expect FIDE to make an exception just because he’s the top contender?
Come on now. This really isn’t a high bar and it only applies to the top tournaments. They will allow any legwear that is not jeans. Literally every professional sports has some form of equipment requirement and chess is probably one of the cheapest.
If you think world championship contenders can’t be expected to afford normal trousers, what do you think athletes spend on running shoes, baseball gloves and ice skates?
No respectable newspaper would platform a foreign billionaire trying to meddle in an election. The fact that the owners pushed this through, overruling their own staff, should be a clear sign to everyone: billionaires buy up news organizations to influence the population and undermine democracy. Even if the individual journalists have the utmost integrity, they will just get strong armed by upper management. The same thing happened with Bezos and the Washington Post.
“Something must be done. Milei is doing something, therefore that must be done”
See how that is a fallacy?
I’m not sure what other options there were
Argentina is the victim of decades of capitalist exploitation. There is no quick fix (no matter what the Wolverine-wannabe would have you believe). Cutting spending is probably part of the solution, but the distribution is crucial. Milei is mostly targeting the poor and selling out to foreign investors. That makes the numbers look good, but only benefits the rich.
The military industrial complex