NotJustForMe @ NotJustForMe @lemmy.ml

Posts

0

Comments

125

Joined

2 yr. ago

Well, it might be helpful in the current predicament. Going after the perp, without taking care of the vulnerabilities might make them take a real interest and get more data out. So make sure it's all off the grid.

Make sure it's also deleted from the Internet archive. From search engines and so on.

We got police scammed for a while because my streaming wife's contact was in some obscure 15-year-old backup of her first website on the internet archive. Before we used a service for that stuff. It had been offline for a decade already, so nobody even thought about it.

Have you heard about context? The post and my reply were about purchases and online data. And naturally, "everything FOSS" is about stuff you can run on said root-server. Which would be email and cloud-storage. Bought music and videos. Stuff of value.

It was also about people who care. I don't protect my stuff out of fear. It's worth something to me. I don't eat healthy out of fear, but because I'm worth something. I care about my parents, not out of fear they might die, but because I value their life. You have it the wrong way buddy.

You somehow made it about smartphones and illiterate elderly people. I never said "everyone needs to do it" I said it's the way to go, and then showed ways how even illiterate and elderly people could do it, if it would be important to them. By using standard ways of using services. Like people do. And that I did only because you said that they couldn't.

What is your problem with generalizing? Underprivileged people? What? It's about people who care. And they find a way. Are you aware that all of that stuff can be run on a $25 minicomputer?

You obviously don't care, but rather enjoy misquoting people, so it fits your agenda. And then going the narcissistic route and belittling them.

You don't care. Fine. Many people do, from all areas of life. And people manage, because they care. You have a disabling attitude and act like a victim. Fine. Be that way. Live in fear of the actual world. I hope it won't bite you in the ass.

And I really don't know why I should phrase my posts so that a media addicted person is interested in them. I don't care what you do. At all. Value your possessions, don't value them.

Self-hosted private data run on FOSS is the way to go. Period. Things one buys and own should be theirs to keep.

Fine. Be that guy.

Setting up that complicated FOSS stuff took me six hours, ten years ago. With another hour every six months to maintain, if at all, as most things update themselves. And you know what? My parents can use them too, as they are all set up to be multi-user by default.

You just don't care. Why argue about it then, trying to make others not care, spreading your ignorance. Even calling me a fearmonger. You being afraid is not on me. It's your own ignorance.

Perhaps, just perhaps, you should have taken a minute to learn about the tech you are using. Torrented for years, eh? And now you are the literal jock putting down nerds, because they did learn? And we nerds spent two decades at making it all easy. Installing your own cloud on a root server takes five clicks and ten minutes for heaven's sake. Installing the root server itself is done in a matter of two hours. They even come hardened out of the box.

I can't argue with ignorance. I've never talked about replacing each and every technology with FOSS. Just the sensible ones, the ones with money attached. With privacy attached.

And that is both cheap, and easy to do. And your parents could just hire someone. You know, like hiring a carpenter, doctor, gardener. Have you heard of businesses? You don't have to spend ten minutes on it.

FOSS is being used by a fringe part of the population. Why change that, you don't care. Why should anyone think differently?

You are strawmanning, adding new topics at will too. I can't write a book here.

Feel free to take it as a win. I wonder though, why are you here, and not on reddit? Oh. Right. I would guess: because of your freedom and privacy, right? Did you get banned there? Your comments deleted? So you do care. Just not enough? Just a tiny portion of people use lemmy, after all.

Where to draw the line? Damn double standards, eh? .

Exactly the point I apparently failed to make. It never worked. Yet we are holding on to it. Just with the added caveat that the weapons are now money, and the wilds are gone.

You do? I wonder how that would work. Can't see it, personally.

Making fun for STILL using it. If our navy would navigate by the stars at night, it would be laughed at, right? And rightly so. ;)

A light form was tribalism. If you didn't go with the flow, you were expelled. With enough expelled ones, new tribes were formed. It kinda created human diversity for a while. There was only so much room on the river, so at some point more elaborate systems emerged. And the people with the biggest huts made those rules. Rules were made so that they could keep those huts. Extremely simplified.

We now don't have places to banish people to. That's why the cry for housing is emerging. Someone took the wild away. They should provide an alternative. I believe that's the whole idea behind wanting the rich to pay. For some reason they were allowed to own everything. Often for centuries.

It makes little sense to people today. How was anyone allowed to walk somewhere, stake a claim, and own it forever? Even defending it with lethal force? Why aren't we anymore?

Well, it takes some time to grow up to be able to find food and water. How long until we can walk even?

Food, water and means to provide an upbringing until offspring can care for themselves, those could be considered basic rights.

Housing is so far into the technological advancements, building up on so many other systems, I fail to see how that can be a right.

Air and food on the other hand, and sensible means to acquiring those. Well. There certainly is room for discussion. When people start owning land, keeping others to effectively do those things, they should have to provide alternatives. Or we have to abolish ownership of natural resources at all. Both can't work together. That's ineffective, of course, and makes planning and advancement difficult.

The price of capitalism and ownership of nature should be compensation. Nothing natural about social structures. If they want to continue those money games, they need to play by the rules of nature. Or they'll go down with chopped-off heads at some point.

Absolutely. So instead of building up on that, declaring everyone may own something, making them mini billionaires in principle; yeah, make owning land illegal. That would be the natural conclusion.

You are basically saying: other people owning things and keeping me from building a house and a live should be illegal. Your solution: Make everyone own something, so they can build a house! Houses for everyone, hurray! But hey, my family is twice as big as yours, my house should, by right, be bigger. And hey, my farm supplies for ten families, it should, by right, be bigger. You don't want to farm, let me buy your land and provide for you. And so the circle begins.

I'd say, that thinking is what got us here in the first place.

I haven't read up on official human rights. Who made them? Did someone bother to ask most humans?

This is a Sunday-morning coffee post, not a detailed world-view. Feel free to ask, but refrain from shooting things down. It's not like I've spent hours on this.

How are they defined, human rights? I'd say anyone in my way to spread my genes keeps me from being a human.

As a pragmatist, I'd say breathing and eating, and perhaps warmth and caring are human rights. We can't do any of them on our own after being born, and without them some really crappy humans emerge. Breathing should be top tier. Anyone disturbing that should be under heavy focus. Can't do anything without air.

After that, once we are fairly independent, doing things to keep people keeping me from growing up and procreating should be my right.

Killing someone else would keep them from doing that, so not being killed by other humans seems like one. Killing others would disqualify me from being human, and I would give up my rights by that act. Straightforward stuff.

Mix in social structures, and it becomes complicated.

Being homeless? Build a commune somewhere. Why insist on being near that techno-tribe with internet. It's nothing but a tribe, has nothing to do with survival or being human. Having modern amenities can't be a right. Other humans invented them at some point.

Which leads to something no human should have a right to: owning land. Because owning land keeps humans from realizing their purpose and keeps them from being free to be human.

Housing is a right? That's ridiculous. That's a technological achievement from other people. So is monetary wealth. How can those be a right. If nobody came along inventing them, nobody would have them. Can't be a right. At all. That is just the consequences of capitalism and ownership of natural resources.

Half Life 2 was mostly noted for the extreme technical advancements. Take a look at what a gaming pc looked like when it came out. It shouldn't have been allowed to be so advanced.

Half Life 1 was the one with the gameplay advancements. I played both on release, and both times felt like I've just entered another multi-verse.

Far Cry 1 managed that, too.

None of them hold up today. They are still as great as they were back then, but the feeling is all gone. I've recently finished all of them again, just to check.

I'm a big Guild Wars 2 fan, though I don't play that much anymore. Often in the game, Guild Wars 1 references, and stories told by players of how great it was, made me want to try it.

It still fully works, and can be played. But for me, it was a no-go. I could live with the graphics, and the environments were fine. Good music and sounds.

The interface killed it for me. Dozens of windows, shortcuts, clunky ways of doing things, the inventory. I couldn't take it anymore after a few hours.

It's not about disliking old interfaces. I basically live on the Linux-shell, and I still play xcom: ufo-defense. But the gw1 one is all over the place, like it hasn't been planned but just happened by random people dropping into the studio and adding some stuff for the fun of it.

Come to think about it, it isn't even about old games. I couldn't play Xenonauts for the same reason. I suppose I just don't enjoy clunky interfaces...

Thank you for taking the time.

Those launchers will be installed even if you use steam. You are mixing up store and launcher. The launcher often exists to have a viable game without steam running.

Saying it has absolutely nothing to do with it is a bit weird. I have bought most of my games on Steam since 2014, yet I have all the launchers.

Gog is the way to go for non-online games. And all the classics. And yeah, of course, the games often require online components. Not much to be done there. Sometimes, things just die.

Sometimes, they don't. I still run a Trackmania server. Glorious.

So if steam went down, my games with launchers would still work. All others would be a crap shoot, at least until valve releases some offline-steam as a farewell for their customers.

Or they'll have to resort to cracks, which could be illegal, or even criminal in some areas of the world.

What fearmongering. Being cautious and talking about it is fearmongering now?

And why shouldn't privately run FOSS solutions be viable for the majority of users? Millions and millions are doing it.

That's like saying that cooking isn't viable for home-use and that all people should just order their food, trusting that the service holds up their deal regarding quality. If they even follow a standard.

It is just a matter of lifestyle and how much one values their own authority over things. You seem to be biased in this area, yet I'm sure, in other areas you are doing exactly what you are calling me a nut job for.

You are throwing opinions out without any reasoning attached.

I'm not very political or versed in the science about them, but does anarchy exclude guidelines and collaboration? I'd have thought it would enhance those things.

If there isn't anything enforcing rules and laws, a government would be informational, making guidelines based on what people found to work best. Like a giant kickstarter paired with Wikipedia.

Many guidelines will be followed. Like, boil your chicken before eating it. Good to know, and most will do it. Some won't, for whatever reason.

Think village assembly, fund-raisers, donations.

I might be completely off here. In my mind, people work great together, until there are rules to exploit. The best of us always comes out despite enforcing structures.

The short of it is "power to the people".

Rules don't negate anarchy. I don't follow rules for fear of punishment, but because they make sense. If they don't make sense, I seek explanation. If there isn't a good one, I ignore it.

Is this the Rules version for No Morality without God?

How does that make a difference? Anyhow, I meant to write privately owned. My mistake.

So you don't have time for that? Spend two hours reading stipulations for a service that you might use for a decade or longer? That you might spend thousands of your currency on? What happened to the world. So fast. So furious.

Some people don't get how you can separate understanding the logic of something and not supporting it at the same time.

Don't worry, that is normal. Im getting laughed at left and right for having my own root-server with all my services running on it, all FOSS.

Most of them were born with google already existing, it is part of nature. They haven't seen a giant go down yet.