AggressivelyPassive @ agressivelyPassive @feddit.de

Posts

16

Comments

1,465

Joined

2 yr. ago

I'm pretty sure, ChromeOS also uses a GNU userland.

My windows have arches, BTW.

That sounds like duct-tape-Nixos with extra steps.

Then you either have very large hands or don't update that much. When I did use Arch for a while, Pacman often enough broke some stuff.

It also wasn’t what I was referring to when I said I broke my shit by a mistake so you’re sticking words in my mouth.

No, I interpret your words in a way appropriate here. You said, that only mistakes cause errors, I said that updates caused errors, and that I don't think updates count as mistakes. So either you think that updating is a mistake, or we have fundamentally different experiences using Arch. I'm only sticking the shit in your mouth that you left their in the first place.

Doing an update is not a mistake.

Again, this is exactly how the system is supposed to be used. You run whatever the update command is on your system occasionally. If that regularly breaks your system, the OS is not a stable platform. That might have its reasons, but it doesn't change the facts.

"That I didn't cause myself" is basically self-gaslighting. Using a system in exactly the way it's supposed to be used shouldn't cause any issues. Regular updates shouldn't cause issues. Sure, it can happen, but it shouldn't be the norm.

If you actually want to use your machine, keeping the machine from nuking itself shouldn't be a hobby on its own. I need a reliable platform to work on, not a minefield on a fault line.

But you don't. And neither do 99.99% of users.

Powergrids need to be upgraded anyway, simply because of EVs and heat pumps. All the energy that was formerly distributed via gas stations and pipes now has to be pushed through the grid.

Apart from that, local storage is actually pretty great for handling fluctuations, since it's essentially a smoothing capacitor.

Cities are a problem, but that's what large scale production like wind is for. Obviously, large storage facilities are also needed, but hydro power, hydrogen and a few local batteries could easily supplement the grid.

And they will argue that whistleblowing is actually a crime, because, uhm, it's, uhm, yeah it's illegal! And if it's illegal to be a good citizen, then this is totally warranted and no scandal at all, because only bad people do illegal things!

Many people are willing to sacrifice a lot of people for the tiny chance of maybe stopping a criminal once.

It's not my conflation, it's the "official" conflation in Germany, I wrote that several times in this thread.

Settler groups are, as far as I know, not automatically illegal or sanctioned. If there were persons that were sanctioned, this would look different, though. Also, a newspaper is just more public. If you don't advertise that your account is used for potentially extremist reasons, you will probably be able to fly under the radar.

Banks are businesses, no matter who owns them. Even stateiest state business is - as the name implies - a business. And businesses and internal rules. It's not "racist" either.

Again, be angry at whoever made BDS antisemitic, not the bank.

On a more personal note: do you really think that your childish tantrums are helping your cause? I don't even disagree with your point, but just try to explain the reasoning behind the situation and why your critic, and that of the paper here is wrong - and you call me names. Do you think that helps? Do you think, you'll be taken seriously like that? Foaming mouths don't seem very convincing, even if they do have good points .

Being insulting is probably a really good way to convince people.

Anyway, this is not "persecution", it's KYC and compliance. Banks don't want to deal with extremist organizations. At all. And if your business deals with organizations that are considered extremist, banks don't want you as a customer.

The reason behind that is simply that BDS is considered an antisemitic organization. Be angry at whoever decided that, but don't blame banks for doing their job. I bet your opinion would be very very different, if the organization in question happened to be AfD related. And that's what experts call double standards.

And BDS is considered an antisemitic organization by several agencies. I don't agree with that assessment, but that's exactly what KYC is for. Banks don't want to be involved with such organizations and it's not necessarily their job or authority to draw the line. These banks are either AöR or cooperatives, they have an internal ruleset, set by the owners/members. And that ruleset probably has a paragraph about extremism and antisemitism. If the bank now lets this client openly operate with entities that are considered extremist, they are not compliant. Simple as that.

Again, I'm not a fan of the BDS categorization, but acting like the banks are somehow targeting that client specifically is plain wrong.

Why, though? The new guy might not let them keep their loot and what do they care if a bunch of poor subhumans die in a ditch somewhere else?

You don't get into these positions for good stances on truth and ethics.

I'm so skeptical that AI will deliver large scale economic value.

The current boom is essentially fueled by free money. VCs pump billions into start-ups, more established companies get billions in subsidies or get their customers to pay outrageous amounts on promises. Yet, I have yet to see a single AI product that is worth the hassle. The results are either not that good or way too expensive, and if you couldn't rely on open models paid for by VC, you wouldn't be able to get anything off the ground.

Nobody fired workers because of AI, that's just the narrative so they don't have to say "we're running out of money".

Will increasing the model actually help? Right now we're dealing with LLMs that literally have the entire internet as a model. It is difficult to increase that.

Making a better way to process said model would be a much more substantive achievement. So that when particular details are needed it's not just random chance that it gets it right.

Where exactly did you write anything about interpretation? Getting "details right" by processing faster? I would hardly call that "interpretation" that's just being wrong faster.