barsoap @ barsoap @lemm.ee

Posts

32

Comments

4,490

Joined

2 yr. ago

You are simply doing genocide apologia here

I have been calling what Israel is doing a genocide like four or five times now. In this very thread. Watch where you're aiming.

There is a difference between a prosecutor calling the accused a murderer, and a judge calling the accused a murderer. Can you follow me this far.

Free, Libre, and Open Source Software

The FSFE has an overview over the various terms but tldr FLOSS is the one that has the least amount of agitated neckbeards breathing down your neck because it a) includes both free software and open source and b) includes the "L" that clarifies that what's meant is free as in speech, not free as in beer.

...and I guess it's about software hygiene?

Judges. Scholars. Neither operate on the assumption of guilt, but assumption of innocence. And there's a very fucking good reason to do that, to see what assumption of guilt does to a people simply observe how the Israeli right considers Palestinians: Guilty unless proven otherwise. You can't fight barbarism by succumbing to it.

And that has to be established, instead of just assumed... If you're a scholar or judge. Activists can and should just assume it given that there's plenty of circumstantial evidence.

You don't want activist scholars or judges because then you don't have scholars or judges any more, is all I'm saying. Leave the activism to the activists.

No such a thing as genocide proper and genocide not proper.

That's not what I said. There's a difference between genocidal acts and genocide, same as there's a difference between breaking a promise and fraud.

You don’t want a genocide to be declared a decade after just like it happened in Bosnia

Yes we want exactly that, because genocide needs to be proven thoroughly because otherwise deniers have an attack surface. But we also want to intervene much earlier. Those two things are not at odds.

A livestreamed genocide where the perpetrators were unapologetically genocidal since day 0

That's evidence of a genocidal act, and of intent of the precise perpetrators. It does not, on its own, prove that Israel, as opposed to merely those people, are guilty of genocide. Israel could, for example, have brought them to justice themselves.

And you’re white-washing their cowardice as scholarly integrity and standards. Bullshit.

Upholding things like the presumption of innocence and due process does not preclude me from shouting "stop the thief". As said: I've been doing that since day one. Yet, when dragging that thief before court, I'd still expect the court to actually look at the matter in detail. Those procedural hoops exist for good reason: Justice cannot be served by mob rule.

And many of them did. But if you’re a “genocide scholar” and you’re only now coming to the conclusion that this is genocide. 19 months after real scholars correctly pointed to it. You are not a scholar. You are a glorified record keeper.

All of them have been agreeing that Israel is committing genocidal acts pretty much since month, if not week, one. Then the scholarly debate started on whether the sum of genocidal acts already constitutes genocide proper. It's one of those cases where scholars make distinctions that activists don't like because activists like simple narratives, punchy slogans, clear-cut lines, as opposed to getting bogged down in nuance.

I'm not saying that activists are wrong calling it a genocide, I've been predicting that the Kahanites are going to use the opportunity on day fucking one, but it's also not right to expect scholars to lower their standards, simplify their analytic framework. There's a good reason why they apply metric tons of nuance to everything.

The EU is pumping a lot of money into FLOSS, often not even for administrative use (like, say, lemmy gets EU funding), but at far as adoption rate in administration is concerned well the Commission is one of the worst offenders. As in municipalities realising they can't fully switch to LibreOffice because they need to apply for EU funds and the commission only accepts .docx. Parliament happily spending money on something and the executive getting around to getting its shit together are two different things.

OTOH it's not all about Microsoft and the like, a lot of administrative software is special-purpose, written by private companies according to specs, paid for by public money. Making that kind of thing open source is a no-brainer. It's also a way better use of money to improve and customise some open source ERP than to go to SAP and get a customised solution there.

And a lot of that has to do with lacking competency in administration -- outside of police, specifically IT forensics, it's usually quite dire. States have no issues figuring out whether a blueprint makes sense when they're issuing building permits, road and railroad engineering, of course they can do that, but IT? Nope. Bring in the private consultants and private consultants are basically the marketing arm of big software companies.

Yep exactly that. A fascinating side-effect is that models become better at logic when you tell them to talk like a Vulkan.

Hate crime against gay people isn’t recognised by law

...it's not recognised in e.g. Germany either? Crime is recognised by law which plenty of states consider plenty. Punching people outside of self-defence is wrong doesn't really matter to many jurisdictions why you're doing it.

Protections against workplace etc. discrimination were introduced in 2014, gay marriage is on society's agenda but as so often the first reading was controversial and now there's a war and the constitution can't be changed, anyway.

You could say the same thing about people getting hospitalised at prides about Poland. Ukraine is a post-soviet state so the starting point was "not great, not terrible" (that is, it wasn't literally illegal to be gay but no social acceptance whatsoever), and is moving in the right direction. Don't make the perfect the enemy of the good.

Do note that the likes of right sector don't have wider societal backing. Politically, they're very much fringe.

A was talking about how they fight, not how they spar... In an edited video. An edited video of a notoriously vain man, for consumption by his fans. Commented by another man with enough of a martial arts beard to declare a clear win a draw and who knows exactly how to keep armchair blackbelts clicking on his videos. No shade though I mean if just one Tate bro now watches Johnson instead of Tate that's a good thing.

He's got talent, yes, I already acknowledged that. He's got some training, that combination is how he beat up complete amateurs (seriously -- look at the fight record of the people he fought). He's probably hitting bags regularly, but, and here comes the kicker: Bags don't win Olympic medals. Bags don't study their opponent. Bags don't evade. Bags don't out-focus and out-strategise. There's a reason he quit kickboxing and that's because he realised he doesn't have the mind for it (Obligatory Bruce Lee) and quitting early allowed him to grift better.

Watch the Raab vs. Halmich fights one day if you get the chance. Raab is certainly not even a proper amateur when it comes to skill (those are meme fights), but just to get an impression of how 30kg weight difference don't mean shit in the face of a skill gap. Their height difference is 20cm, Khelif/Tate would be more around 10.

Modulo everything, you need to have been a resident for at least five years to have any chance of getting security clearance. Also it would be "not a shredlet".

Those boxes will be unicorns no matter what, though, also, they're not necessarily part of the general IT infrastructure. Someone in catastrophe defence might be running fluid simulations using some god awful expensive windows-only software but chances are they can manage their own box, and if not, the ministry will still have IT staff who can deal with that kind of thing.

Blender got ported to Linux in 1998, to Windows in 1999. The modal interface and key command language is no accident, it literally is a 3d vi.

Linux is generally strong when it comes to 3d graphics workstations, it inherited IRIX' market share, plenty of artists around, especially in the film industry, who'd go on a strike if you took away dragging windows with alt+LMB. Graphics, that is, CAD is dominated by Windows as CAD started out as 2d sketch software which ran on cheap DOS machines.

Houdini is also Unix-native and Blender's only surviving competitor (considered by features, not industry inertia), Maya started out as cross-platform IRIX+Windows.

Best I can give you is dataport looking for nextcloud admins, it's also listed as a component of dPhoenixSuite.

He might -- I doubt with one hand, but in any case the point is not that I'd be keen on fighting either, the point is that Tate would be an easier fight than Khelif. Tate does have the capacity, in principle, to be a good fighter (e.g. you can see is kinaesthetic sense in action when he's dancing, and he does have grit), he could have achieved titles that mean anything to anyone instead of being world champion of beating up complete amateurs and then promptly retiring. Alas, his neuroses are in the way. Lots of show, lots of bluster, dangerous in the sense that a rabid dog is dangerous because, as said, he knows how to be angry. Khelef? Calm, clean, methodical, keeps her centre, actually thinks in the ring. Whole different league, and nothing to do with raw strength. Strength doesn't do shit when you suck at the rest.

Dataport is kinda hit and miss when it comes to developing. It was created by taking the small IT departments of different ministries, agencies, etc, of multiple states, and putting them all under a common roof. They did that because they realised that standard state administration structures and IT weren't really compatible but on the flipside, they also funded a whole new organisation with people accustomed to those very structures, and as dataport is still a public law corporation the internal administration -- think payroll and everything -- will still be done by career state bureaucrats.

It's a different kind of dysfunction than you see in the private sector but dysfunction nonetheless. OTOH working directly with FLOSS upstream will help: It's not that (sufficiently large) FLOSS projects don't have their own bureaucracy, and the bureaucrats that be on dataport's side will respect that.

Regarding maintenance: Aside from hardware upgrades because they make sense (power consumption) or you want new features (latest addition: Graphics tablets to allow citizens to sign stuff without having to print things), there's a constant churn in software requirements as new orders come in on what to do and how to do it. Just because you wrote perfect software doesn't mean that parliament stops passing laws.

As far as usability is concerned: Dataport will also have to train people, and they actually have the funds to do usability studies and such. Much will also depend on the different agencies they're working for, can't fix an agency's workflows for them, and that goes beyond mere IT. I guess a public-law consultancy does make sense but having a ministry for administrative affairs reeks of Sir Humphrey. I guess you could hide it by making it a subsidiary of the court of auditors.

No idea where that number is from but at the start it's just going to be getting rid of MS Office and Exchange, switch to FLOSS telephony, not getting rid of Windows. Licensing costs for 30k seats are certainly higher but you have to offset that with not getting any support from MS any more. Dataport will need a couple of in-house developers to resolve issues and work with upstream. Actual development, not tier 1 support and translating administrative instructions into templates.

Also for the state it's not really about the money, but sovereignty. 188k are also peanuts in 18bn worth of state budget, that's yearly maintenance for what 30km of state roads. Given that we currently don't have any potholes we can afford it.

As to brainrot: Not really applicable. These are managed workplaces and not much will change on the end-user side.

I'd rather fight Tate than Khelif, that's for sure. One of the two knows how to move, the other one knows how to be angry.

…But the Soviets made some good shit, often with the philosophy of “big and simple,” but often well engineered, too.

Of which a disproportionate share was Ukrainian. Valentin Hlushko's engine shot Gagarin into space, Sergei Korolev designed the Soyuz, and Soyuz' successor, Zenith, is Ukrainian.

And that's just rockets. Ukraine designed and built Russia's only aircraft carrier, and their flagship (the Moskva), as well as the missiles that promoted it to submarine.

Ukraine also did the bulk of the heavy lifting fighting back the Nazis. And they're certainly out-innovating and out-engineering Russia right now when it comes to drones.

That's not to say that Russia is completely incapable and they have no scientists or engineers at all, but this equation of "The Soviets did it, so it's Russian" is very misleading.