Skip Navigation

User banner
Posts
13
Comments
1,800
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Yeah Im not a fanboy, I just don't fucking care.

  • MitM attacks are also one of the major threats to MFA.

    They don't seem to talk much about TLS which is the current standard for most things (VoIP, email.) We still use ssh for a lot but HTTPS is secured through TLS 1.3

  • Any decision made to create or preserve jobs is inherently wasteful. You're spending money to avoid losing an economic output that the market has decided no longer needs to exist.

  • If we could use the tritium that would be helpful, it's limited on earth and our only known source off world is in lunar regolith. Plus it's part of the fuel needed to begin a fusion reaction.

  • Sorry the sentence didn't really make sense in hindsight.

    Essentially people love to point out other people's hobbies when they're damaging the environment but conveniently leave out all of the ways their particular hobbies do the same.

    It's easy to say "insert thing here is bad!" When you don't partake in it, which is why a community of mostly computer nerds bitches about sports. It's an easy target since they don't have a personal stake.

  • If it's your game, do it. The people making these memes probably use computers that draw power created with coal and batteries mined in undeveloped and largely exploited nations. Their moral attempt at trying to make golf the one thing that needs to be focused on is just one of convenience because they don't specifically like it.

    Most of their hobbies are just as damaging if your scope of economics goes out a couple of layers.

  • I'm playing both sides, so that I always win.

  • Whatever you say, I've literally had people ask me "why do you play insert game here?" When I tell them why I haven't completely gotten off windows. It's happened multiple times. I'm not getting in my feelings, some of you guys are just insufferable.

    I love Fedora on my old gaming laptop and arch/SteamOS kicks ass on deck, but I'm not giving up my main game that I play for socializing with my friends just because the FOSS community assigns themselves moral superiority for not being on Windows.

  • Destroying the land isn't really the issue, they choose flat terrain to avoid having to do the work. It's the irrigation cost of keeping the greens functional in environments the grass isn't suited for that's the problem.

  • It's like when you discuss music with a metalhead, it's not that you just don't feel anything when you listen to metal, and you don't consider complex polyrhythms to just be objectively "better" because they're harder to play. It's that your music sucks ass and if it's not the right kind of metal it also sucks ass.

    Linux can play most games, but if you like playing games that Linux doesn't play then those games suck and you shouldn't want to play them. That's their perspective.

    Why do you want to play Fortnite or CoD warzone? Don't you know kernel level anticheat is a rOoTkiT?!? (As if they could even define such a thing without resorting to just pointing at shit they don't like and twisting the definition like a Baptist preacher trying to create theology.)

    You can't win with these types of people, Linux can play games! And if it can't it's YOUR FAULT FOR NOT EXCLUSIVELY PLAYING GAMES THAT LINUX CAN PLAY.

  • "However, the skillset has been retained in our documentation for future potential expansion into potential expansion."

  • Damn, now if only we were talking about History instead of a fictional series about themes like sacrifice and character archetypes like "chosen ones."

  • Star Trek: Legacy. I found a copy on eBay awhile back and got it running. Really fun go team up with AI against the Borg while defending DS9.

  • Yeah, you're right. It's not that they're trying to be careful and prevent more damage, it's going to take that long because they're stupid. /s

  • I see we had the same thought process, I think I'd take the mask too even though the coin is technically far more powerful if random in its power.

  • Well it's not their word for hell, that's the point. It means death or grave, the idea of hell wasn't even considered until the Greek started being converted in the first and second century and folded their ideas about the afterlife (including their underworld 'hel') into the mix of Jewish belief about death being non-existence and resurrection being the return from non-existence.

    That's how we get the two testaments treating death differently, and the conflation of the word "sheol" to mean hell, when it really just meant being dead.

  • Might as well, I think it's how my instructor taught it when I was going through school.

  • It wouldn't be, in fact most Christians will self acknowledge that it's not a good thing with their explanations for the following series of questions.

    1. Lucifer had free will, and existed in heaven alongside God in the same way that we will supposedly exist alongside God in heaven. It was entirely possible for him to defy/rebel/choose to not be in union with that God and be cast out of heaven. Do we have free will in heaven?

    1a. If yes, then do we have the ability to also reject and sin once we are in heaven according to the salvation of Jesus?

    1b. If we can't, then do we have free will?

    1. If God is altering our state of being in order to make us "ok" with living/worshipping forever, are we still the same individual? Or are we being made into a new being based on a change in our values and desires?

    2a. If we are being changed in some way to accept eternity as good/enjoy it, then how do you reconcile that with the idea that God wants communion with beings of free will? If he's just going to change us to fit the needs of eternity anyways, how is that different than programming sapient robots to worship him? Why go through all of the trouble with having us choose him via free will if he's going to alter/overwrite our consciousness to make us able to deal with immortality? He might as well just start with that if it's the endgame.

    The only way out of the situation is to claim that we do still have free will in heaven and can choose to rebel at any time, or else you're dealing with the philosophy and ethics of how changing a sapient being to want things they didn't before can't possibly coincide with free will.

  • If you have four drives you can do RAID 6 assuming your controller supports it.

    RAID 0 just puts your data on multiple drives, giving you higher read/write speeds but with no built in redundancy.

    RAID 1 is just a copy, you have your data duplicated so that if anything fails there's an immediate copy. No increase in RW speeds.

    RAID 5/6 use "parity data" which operates somewhat like RNA/DNA when going through mitosis. The four building blocks TCGA only connect with one of the other four in pairs of two, so even if you have half the data (RNA) you know what the other half is by logical extension. The difference is that 5 uses 3 drives at a time whereas 6 uses 4, you can only withstand the failure of one drive in RAID 5 but 6 can handle the loss of two.

    RAID 10 (one-zero, not "ten") does exactly what the name suggests, it combines the direct copy of RAID 1 with the striping of RAID 0 to give you double RW speeds with redundancy.

    Each one will reduce your overall storage by a certain amount, either because of copying the data completely or taking up space for "parity data." The only one that doesn't do this is RAID 0 but you have absolutely no redundancy there and if You're considering RAID for home use I'm going to assume that's important to you.

  • Which is exactly why it it's so obvious that it was created by the minds of men. It doesn't make sense to our understanding of the world/physics and the only argument anyone has comes down to "well if this all powerful God I can't prove did exist he'd be able to do all of this in a way we can't understand!"

    Sure, but anyone can theorize an all powerful omnipotent being and then make up whatever rules about them damning/saving you and the necessary conjecture about them being so beyond us that we can't understand it.

    To me that's just a shield against criticism, a red flag that the person making the argument is attempting to bring it into the realm of unfalsifiability. A very human tendency for a very human idea of god.