Hatzegopteryx
Thank you for the positivity 💚 I wholeheartedly agree!
Drama and negativity drives engagement, and this form of engagement can easily trigger a feedback loop in which negativity keeps piling on and voices of support are practically muted.
We are participating in an open source project that has some very ambitious goals. Things can be messy, mistakes happen, there are risks, and people have many different opinions and moods. Heated discussions can be a healthy part of the process. But, once the dust is allowed to settle for a bit, it is good to remember that we are humans and that we are here because we have some shared goals.
I think the majority of people around here are kind and have a positive outlook, but perhaps it is more motivating to speak out when we have negative comments than positive ones. So, thank you for taking the time to write this positive message!
I am going to be that guy and point out that pterosaurs were not dinosaurs, unless you consider primates to be squirrels cause we are distantly related.
Ah, thank you for being that guy! Now I know 😄
Also fun fact pterosaurs may have had a type of feathering which either means that the ancestors of both dinosaurs and pterosaurs had feathers or it evolved at least twice. And on a similar thing of body coverings, stem mamals/proto-mammals had fur before the dinosaurs ever evolved.
Can the feathers and fur (or their impression) be preserved for millions of years in some types of fossilization? Or is the presence of these concluded from the bone structures, fossilized skin, or other not so direct pieces of evidence? And, is any direct evidence of color preserved? No pressure to answer, I am just wondering out loud.
Woah - I had never heard of the Hatzegopteryx. I spent some time today watching videos of this guy today (and its relatives, Quetzalcoatlus and Argentinosaurus). They are really cool.
I know that there is a lot of arguments about what dinosaurs actually looked like - I hope that in the videos they make these guys scarier than they actually were... This video is especially: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYniD_MQ7Rg
Personally, this style (from a great PBS Eons video) is my favorite interpretation:
And artists apparently like to emphasize that these guys could eat small dinosaurs!
I am also quite interested in this. It is not something that keeps me awake at night, and I am not particularly paranoid about it. But I find that working towards answering this question is a fun frame from which to learn about electronics, radio communications, and networking.
Since this appears to be something that is causing you some anxiety, I think it is better if I start by giving you some reassurance in that I have not yet managed to prove that any electronic device is spying on me via a hidden chip. I don't think it is worth being paranoid about this.
I can explain some things that could be done to test whether a Linux computer spying. I am not suggesting that you try any of this. I am explaining this to you so that you can get some reassurance in the fact that, if devices were spying on us in this manner, it is likely that someone would have noticed by now.
The "spy" chip needs some way to communicate. One way a chip might communicate is via radio waves. So, the first step would be to remove the WiFi and Bluetooth dongles and any other pieces of hardware that may emit radio waves during normal operation. There is a tool called a "Spectrum Analyzer" that can be used to capture the presence of specific radio frequencies. These devices are now relatively affordable, like the tinySA, which can measure the presence of radio frequencies of up to 6 GHz.
One can make a Faraday cage, for example, by wrapping the PC with a copper-nickel coated polyester fabric to isolate the PC from the radio waves that are coming from the environment. The spectrum analyzer antennas can be placed right next to the PC and the device is left to measure continuously over several days. A script can monitor the output and keep a record of any RF signals.
Since phones are small, it is even easier to wrap them in the copper-nickel polyester fabric alongside with the spectrum analyzer antenna to check whether they emit any RF when they are off or in airplane mode with the WiFi and Bluetooth turned off.
What this experiment may allow you to conclude is that the spy chip is not communicating frequently with the external world via radio frequencies, at least not with frequencies <= 6 GHz.
Using frequencies higher 6 GHz for a low-power chip is not going be an effective method of transmitting a signal very far away. The chip could remain hidden and only emit the signal under certain rare conditions, or in response to a trigger. We can't rule that out with this experiment, but it is unlikely.
A next step would be to test a wired connection. It could be that the spy chip can transmit the data over the internet. One can place a VPN Gateway in between their PC and the router, and use that gateway to route all the traffic to their own server using WireGuard. All network packets that leave through the PC's ethernet connection can be captured and examined this way using Wireshark or tcpdump.
If one can show that the device is not secretly communicating via RF nor via the internet, I think it is unlikely that the device is spying on them.
Deleted
Permanently Deleted
Jump
You can take a lot of control by using search commands. Here is a list of commands for Google, for example: https://www.lifewire.com/advanced-google-search-3482174
By using commands like these you can narrow down your searches to the point that the impact of SEO is small. You give a much greater weight to the conditions that you have chosen.
It can be a bit of work to write a good search query, but the database that search engines search through is massive, so it makes sense that it would take some work to do this right.
Deleted
Permanently Deleted
Jump
Search engines like google aggregate data from multiple sites. I may want to download a datasheet for an electronic component, find an answer to a technical question, find a language learning course site, or look for museums in my area.
Usually I make specific searches with very specific conditions, so I tend to get few and relevant results. I think search engines have their place.
I used to it eat a lot of it as a child. But now that I think more about nutrition it is a rare treat for me. I don't buy it nor keep any at my home, because if I buy it I'll eat it. If I go out and eat fries I'll usually eat them with mayonnaise. I do like the taste, especially in egg sandwiches.
Fair enough. I just looked it up and if the scale in this image is correct, I agree that the size of the hole looks small in comparison. I also looked at the security video of the crash itself and it is frustrating how little we can see from it.
Since this was such an important event and there seems to be a lack of specific pieces of essential evidence - either because of bad luck or because of a cover-up - I understand the skepticism. And I am not a fan of blindly believing any official narrative. But, without any context, if I see that photo and someone tells me that a plane crashed into that building, I would find it probable simply because the shape is so similar to the photo of the Bijlmer accident that I'm familiar with. A plane crash seems to me like a very chaotic process, so I don't have a good expectation of what the damage should look like.
Maybe I'll look for a pentagon crash documentary some time.
I don't have much of an opinion on this topic, I haven't really looked into it.
But as soon as I saw this image, the El Al Flight 1862 which crashed in the Bijlmer in Amsterdam in 1992 immediately came to mind. The shape of the hole is very similar!
This image shows the likely position of the Bijlmer plane during the crash:
The image you posted of the Pentagon seems to me consistent with what I have seen of the Bijlmer accident, and so the shape of the hole and the absence of wings in the photo does not persuade me personally that no plane was involved.
Essentially, yes.
Whether the term "molecule" technically includes or excludes a piece of metal is a bit more tricky. I lean towards "no" more than "yes" because there are some important differences between what we generally call a "molecule" and how we think about a glassy or a crystalline solid. But I think both positions are arguable. If we are not being pedantic, then essentially yeah.
Thanks. Rebooted the server... Need to find some more permanent solution.
Works flawlessly now :D Thank you again for your hard work!!
Thank you!
Thank you!!! Very happy about the moderation tools!
There is a problem opening community pages. I checked and the bug was introduced with this version.
Is the fact that I recognize this comment evidence that I use Lemmy a bit too much? 😅
Thanks. I have looked into it a bit more and I think that it is the postgres database grabbing all the memory it can. I have set a hard limit for the postgres container. Hopefully this resolves the problem!
Yes, sorry. It is a problem that started over the weekend. I thought I had patched it by doubling the server's RAM and adding a core, but that was not enough. Some process is causing the RAM use to spike and the image backend is crashing because of that.
Thanks. I noticed and reset the server a few minutes ago.
Something has been off recently. The CPU is spiking and the RAM gets used up, which crashes the pict-rs container. The pict-rs won't reconnect until I reset the lemmy Docker container.
I doubled the RAM and added one core, but that was not enough to stop this problem, which means that whatever is causing these spikes is unconstrained. I need to look more deeply into Docker memory management to see if I can limit RAM usage such that the crash can be avoided while remaining functional.
I am not sure as I did not test this one. Maybe you can go in person and get a worker to get you access to the kiosk through your account to print the card. It is one of those massive chains with gyms in every corner. I think that by now they rely on their digital infrastructure and many of their workers are not trained to handle uncommon situations. At least I get that from some of my experiences, but I could be wrong, maybe if I would have called them could have helped me with this. It was just easier to get the app into my old phone, print a card, delete the app.
Thanks! I can imagine preserving a feather for 65 millions of years is no easy feat.