Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)DR
Posts
0
Comments
472
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Glad to hear. If there's a lesson to be taken from here, it's to make sure after installing a distro, make note of anything odd in dmesg, journalctl, etc. There's about eight rabbitholes you could have gone down for weeks and overlooked the obvious here just because we didn't know what "normal" looked like for your system.

  • /drive is not a standard mount in a Debian install. Presumably that's something you did.

    There's also no unaccounted for partitions on /sda

    If you comment that like out for the /drive mount, it should boot. I'd say better than 50/50 the rest of that is red herrings that have been there since you installed

  • The output of journalctl might be helpful for troubleshooting.

    Also a cat of /etc/fstab

    Initial guesses from what I can see: Do you have some sort of drive encryption on and does that encryption rely on your tpm?

    Is that disk being enumerated properly? What does lsblk say? Do you see the partition/filesystem at all?

  • If someone had some theoretical device that could x-ray, 3d image, and 3d print an exact replica of your car though, that would be legal. That's a closer analogy.

    It's not illegal to reverse-engineer and reproduce for personal use. It is questionably legal though to sell the reproduction. However, if the car were open-source or otherwise not copyrighted/patented it probably would be legal to sell the reproduction.

  • (with a few extra steps) yes

    Wage garnishment, repayment plans, etc. The difference is for you it typically requires litigation before you're "allowed" to. Technically it's probably the same for them if someone challenged it, but they have the benefit of litigation costing less than all the paid lump sums, where your proverbial thousand-dollar check would not.

  • To be fair, I think one could argue with a straight face that if we're still buying the products, then we really don't care that much. Why should a company be motivated by morality if we as a society collectively aren't?

    We should hold ourselves to the same standards or we're just hypocrites.

  • I accept the argument that (assuming that is a law at the state/federal level where it applies here in arizona) the dispatcher should be obligated to make a best-effort same as everyone else. That doesn't mandate I have sympathy when best-effort doesn't work out for someone breaking the law in other contexts. Just like you probably wouldn't have sympathy if a burglar fell down your stairs and broke their neck. Yes the EMS is obligated to help, but I still don't have sympathy for the guy who just broke into my house and tried to steal my stuff.

  • 32/50 states have English as the official business language, where all business and official government function must operate. Arizona is one of them.

    Article 28, section 2 of the Arizona state Constitution.

  • So wait.

    The dispatchers from an English speaking country didn't speak enough Spanish. And that frustrated people who illegally trespassed into our country and don't contribute towards funding the service they called.

    ...and we're the bad guy here?

  • Real talk: sideloading is allowed on android in the most maliciously compliant way possible.

    Google restricts what other app stores can be included with devices that ship with play services

    User-sideloaded app stores can't auto-update apps

    Play protect will flag any app that the play store has hashes of, but was installed by another app store. (Developers cannot, for example, upload a list of valid hashes for their apps to Google to prevent false positives here, effectively making other install routes appear as malware if they're different.)