cecilkorik @ cecilkorik @lemmy.ca

Posts

1

Comments

532

Joined

2 yr. ago

fail2ban is mandatory equipment for any ssh server accessible to the public especially on its default port. It's highly configurable, but the default settings will do fine at making it statistically impossible for any user or password to be brute forced.

Well, in my hypothetical scenario, "gamipedia" is not going to have an article about "the sky is", that's not really its purpose. Ideally you'd only have one encyclopedia wiki, or multiple that are willing to work together and not duplicate each other's content. If another competing supposed-encyclopedia instance called "assholepedia" does have an article about "the sky is: a liberal delusion", then you block and defederate that asshole instance. No big deal.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding how it's designed but I don't think I am, and I don't think that's how this works.

A topic definition on the wiki includes the instance it's hosted on. All links to that topic will go to that same instance and all the content for that topic will be served by the one instance as the authoritative source for "That-topic@that-instance" which is the link everyone will use. The federated part is specifically that you can link to topics on other instances and view them through your local instance.

For example, hypothetically, if you are a "fedipedia" author and you are writing a "fedipedia" article about a video game, and you mention a particular feature of the video game, you can include in your "fedipedia" article a link to a topic about that particular feature on "wikia-gamipedia" or even "the-games-own-wiki.site" and interact with and maybe even edit that content without needing to make accounts on all these other wikis. It's like it's all hosted on one centralized wiki, but it's hosted on different servers that are all talking to each other.

Of course, it's possible both our hypothetical "wikia-gamipedia" AND "the-games-own-wiki.site" will have their OWN, completely SEPARATE topics about the video game feature in question. The topics might even have exactly the same name. That's allowed. In that case, you'll have to decide for yourself which one is more credible and useful, and which one you want to link to and interact with, because yes, two different federated wikis can have different topics with totally different content.

Just like on Lemmy you can have two different communities with the same name but totally different people and content because they're on different instances. That's not really the general intention of how communities are supposed to work though. The intention is that you can pick the one community that is the "right" one for you, or the largest, and use that and hopefully other people will do the same. You can all pick that same instance/community, no matter which account you live on, even if it's not hosted on your local instance. You don't have to use the one from your local instance, or from any particular instance. That's what the federation does.

China. The people are super nice, sweet, helpful, lovely people. It's just their government I hate. I don't know if they hate it too or not since they're not free to say but I think they're nice people and they deserve better.

He's also expanding their mandate to cover more local news, so that's going to have a lot of costs that won't be going to executives.

Porter still barely qualifies as national, and even that's a super recent development, but I agree. No middle seats, no bullshit, just a cheap and efficient way to get from A to B with minimum discomfort and minimum airport hassle. Porter is awesome. I hope they soon buy dozens and dozens more of those Embraer jets and really give Westjet and Air Canada a real run for their money.

Even better if they can connect up their medium-haul network hubs with the Embraers and continue to use their Dash-8s to provide feeder service from under-served, under-utilized regional airports. I don't mind hopping on a short connection as long as they can keep the price modest and it's not connecting at either end of some 50-kilometers-across dystopian nightmare maze like Pearson (which Air Canada always insists on doing).

Porter and Westjet both have right idea spreading the traffic out to other airports around Toronto like City Center, Hamilton, Kitchener, London, etc. Porter has the even better idea of using some of them as hubs instead of Pearson and I'm all for it.

Yeah he's got some serious abusive spouse energy going on at times with all the emotional whiplash. Beats the shit out of you and then "aww baby, come on, you know I love you" then beats you some more.

This guy vocally praises Hitler and the Nazis. So if you manage to find any people defending and supporting this sack of shit, they are Nazis too, and remember that punching Nazis is not promoting hate, it is a civic duty and a Canadian tradition. I look forward to this barbarian getting his ass handed to him in the election and hope he ends up in jail again.

What they're saying isn't wrong, Canadian productivity is very low, innovation is primarily isolated to large institutions, many of which are subsidized, and occasional small plucky outliers who have snuck through the great filter of regulations and usually get quickly gobbled up. The problem is I doubt any solution these tech bros propose will be used to improve it. I don't trust their motives at all.

I do have problems with the way so many of Canada's regulations are unfairly oppressive and obstructionist for actual entrepreneurs -- I'm speaking of actual single individuals and very small groups, with genuinely limited resources, who don't have the time or energy or employees or financial capacity to navigate the complicated bureaucracy of tediously expensive, overwhelmingly detailed and sometimes changing regulations. Everyone wants a piece of the pie before you've even made any pie. Our regulations tend to be very bottom-heavy and front-loaded and become relatively more onerous the smaller and less well resourced you are, they lack any reasonable scaling, exemptions and incentives for small business and small operations and I think that's intentional, it is a classic protectionist strategy which immensely pleases many of our entrenched oligopolies.

I can think of many very highly specific examples that I'm not going to share because I don't want to get into the weeds of highly specific industries, but I think it's safe to claim that they all have their fair share of anti-small-business regulation. Of course taxes are one issue that every business has to deal with that could be improved and simplified vastly for small business. Tax credit programs like SR&ED that are ostensibly there to foster innovation tend to just become distracting time and effort black holes for small businesses while huge companies like Bell employ or hire experts on this process with a legal team to back them up who help them walk away with millions.

Anyone who's ever had to deal with Transport Canada for anything vehicle, aviation or rocket or drone related, or Industry Canada for anything radio related, or Health Canada for anything person related, or Natural Resources Canada for the environment, the RCMP about anything potentially dangerous like weapons, or CFIA for anything food related, or CBSA for anything border related, knows that these organizations are deeply risk-averse brick walls for entrepreneurs, hobbyists and innovators alike. And that's basically their mandate. However the larger and more well-funded you are, the less risky you seem to magically appear to them. I'm speaking from some experience here. And another problem is look how many I've just named off the top of my head, it's not even always clear who you need to be talking to about what. The problem is small business needs to be able to take risks to succeed and if that's going to cause risks to the public, I understand the concern, but the government and their agencies need to step in and provide tools and regimes where we can test and minimize and manage that risk instead of stonewalling and putting the entire burden on small businesses which simply cannot bear that burden. You're always guilty until proven innocent when it comes to these sort of regulations and unless you have the resources to prove that you're innocent you'll never be allowed to make any progress. And the height of the bar required to prove you're innocent seemingly changes based on how much money you have, but in the opposite direction of what it should.

If you try to get around the lack of resources by going to the banks for a loan to pay for or hire the resources you need, a) you'll have to give them collateral and the banks love that, and b) now you've got a staunchly conservative bank looking over your shoulder constantly and they hate risk even more than the government agencies, and c) the banks themselves are strictly regulated so even if they wanted to help you they often can't. That is sort of a crappy way of solving the problem, and so the fact that it doesn't solve the problem isn't so concerning, as it wouldn't even have to BE a problem if all the rest of the regulations on small business weren't so bad, but it closes off any possible relief valve of letting the banks inject capital into small businesses which could at least mitigate the blockage.

Canada seems to have this general attitude that treating small business and large business exactly the same is exactly what makes their regulations fair and even-handed when in fact and in actual outcome it's anything but. "Bank of Dave" provides a great illustration of some of the unfairness in this kind of unnecessary and harmful overregulation of very small fish in a very big pond and the way it inhibits actual entrepreneurs and entire communities from achieving success, it's UK based but I think the general concepts translate pretty well to Canada too.

There are some parts of it that aren't great and maybe it could be streamlined, like the cookie warning which should be implemented technically in the browser and part of the cookie protocol. Transition it to making it legally the responsibility of tech giants and advertisers like Microsoft and Google to comply and be honest about what they're tracking, rather than the sole burden falling on each individual website. Somehow I doubt that's the only thing they'll be interested in discussing but I'm going to wait and see what they actually do before I judge.

The United States of Canada has a better sound to it than the 51st state if you ask me.

I guess they ran out of Public Integrity to report on, there's none left.

I appreciate your attempt to engage in good faith, but no, my question was very rhetorical. I am not really interested in discussing any answers to that question that neither you nor I would support. If you do have an argument to make, feel free to do so. I may or may not respond. But in case my own point's not clear, I think most of the opposition to solar panels comes from disingenuous efforts by companies with a financial interest in fossil-fuel, and I think they try to cast it in as negative a light as they possibly can, and I don't think their perspective is even worth considering as they continue their ghastly sprint to destroy the future of life on this planet so they can earn money.

Why is this always worded in such a shitty way that makes it sound like a bad thing. "swamps the grid" "overwhelming the region" "prices slumping". Fuck all the "energy companies" and their bought politicians and journalists who think or at least talk this way.

Here let me fix it for you: "France now has abundant solar energy, providing free electricity to all homes and businesses that want it, while plenty of solar capacity remains in reserve, available for meeting increased demands or storing for later or night-time use by refilling hydroelectric reservoirs"

Yes please. Happy to see the Green Party putting out some solid ideas.

Yeah Carney's pretty unequivocal support of this guy was a big blunder and significantly eroded my confidence in him. Fortunately for Carney, he's still the leader I'm most confident in, but that's only because he had such a strong start and because he's up against such uninspiring and unpleasant alternatives. It's not because he's playing his cards particularly well. If this election is going to continue to devolve into picking the least worst candidates, I may yet change my mind.

Who would've ever thought we would've ever needed something like this. I am glad my veteran father never lived to see this happen, it would've broken him. This is what he fought against.

Celebrity culture is gross, but if you're going to watch that nonsense I agree Canadian is better (and somewhat less gross) than American.

I've got plenty, if the Americans invade, I'll share.

Yeah when I first started there was one guy whose code reviews I dreaded, he would nitpick every detail and he would stand by it, he would tell me to do it a completely different way that was 10x more work. It felt like I would never get my stories done because I had drawn "that asshole" in the code review lottery.

Years later, I came to realize that he was actually the best, he taught me so much about the way I should be thinking of things and structuring things, that have saved so much time and trouble later on, I now specifically reach out to him for a review when I am trying to do something complex because I know he's going to give me an honest, thorough and useful review. Nobody's doing anyone any favours in the long run by rubber stamping things, it may help you keep your sprint velocity up, but it's not going to result in high quality code, and the bad quality code will inevitably bite you.