douglasg14b @ douglasg14b @lemmy.world

Posts

11

Comments

935

Joined

2 yr. ago

Same reason people think the earth is flat, the moon landing was a hoax, and that vaccines cause autism?

A lack of critical thinking skills, and general stupidity.

There's no guarantee it's even the police. Could be sex traffickers for all you know.

There is no guarantee this is an arrest.

These people are not showing that they are law enforcement. For all we know we just watched someone get kidnapped by sex traffickers.

Bystanders shouldn't stand by idle, if someone is getting kidnapped right in front of you, and you're able bodied, you should do something about it, violently. Even if it means grabbing the closest heavy thing and throwing it at them. Yell, make a scene, yell out "kidnappers help me!" ....etc

NEVER LET YOURSELF OR SOMEONE ELSE BE TAKEN TO A SECONDARY LOCATION. EVER.

Anything your captors are willing to do in public is only a fraction of what they would be willing to do in private.

You don't necessarily have to put yourself in harms way, but you can still show some level of resistance to kidnappers, rapists, and the rest. No one should just let those things happen in front of them, and simply pull their phone out to film.

That's some psycho pass level shit.

Legal defense doesn't matter for you when you're shot or choked dead by "police" because you defended yourself against an unknown assailant.

Well, this is in JS to be clear

Instead of

const name = user.name

It's

const userToName(user) => user.name;

const name = userToName(user);

Ad nauseum.

We have a principal engineer on our team that is pushing this sort of style, hard.

It's essentially obfuscation, no one else on the team can really review, nevermind understand and maintain what they write. It's all just functional abstractions on top of abstractions, every little thing is a function, even property/field access is extracted out to a function instead of just.... Using dot notation like a normal person.

You might not necessarily have to fork BitTorrent and instead if you have your own protocol for grouping and breaking the data into manageable chunks of a particular size and each one of those represents an actual full torrent. Then you won't necessarily have to worry about completion levels on those torrents and you can rely on the protocol to do its thing.

Instead of trying to modify the protocol modify the process that you wish to use protocol with.

Options:

1. Very Wet paper towel on the plate, microwave the plate for 30-60s
2. Heat it up over a flame, a ways away (ie. Butane torch under it, but like 12" away)
3. If you have a small countertop over or air fryer/toaster. Heat it up in there briefly
4. If you're making toast, place it on top of the toaster (not too long, it can still break).

You can also use an oven, but that's a lot of air to heat up for just a plate. If you're already using it though, that's a win.

I heat my plates up alllll the time.

Let this be a lesson to write down any fake data you enter into accounts.

My keepass entries maintain all the fake form into for each account, makes it possible to move forward in instances just like this.

Oh for sure, that's quite reasonable, though at some point you just move towards re-creating BitTorrent, which will be the actual effect you want.

You could build an appliance on top of the protocol that enables the distributed storage, that might actually be pretty reasonable 🤔

Ofc you will need your own protocols to break the data up into manageable parts, chunked in a same way, and make it capable of being removed from the network or at least made inaccessible for dmca claims. Things that is completely preventing the internet archive from being too much of a target from government entities.

The actual volume of data is kind of insane for distribution. You start running into many scale problems.

At ~70PB of storage, assumed redundant as well. And at ~$15/TB JUST for HDDs alone, you're talking $2.1 million in just hard drives.

Installation, hardware, and facility costs will at least pentuple that number, if we're being crazy conservative. Making the cost to stand up an archive $10.5 million?

During this process I found out that their finances are public and there is more reliable information out there:

• $2/GB for permanent storage, overall ( $2000/TB)

The cost to store the data and run the archive is a whopping $36mill/y at the moment.

Which if you consider what they do is incredibly cheap. And easily fundable by even a small municipality never mind a large Nation.

And funded by who?

It's nice to say that it should be decentralized, but who is funding the development of that? Are you donating to IA?

Always has been.

Right beside the fact that their monetary model relies on user activity tracking. Yet they advertise privacy.

A browser that had a seemingly unlimited budget for advertising before it even had users is suspicious as hell.

I've never trusted brave.

It is, though the numbers are depressing.

A site like Reddit grows in its daily active users more than 15x (!!!) entire MAU base of Lemmy. "Reddit migrations" are barely a margin of error for them.

This is excluding, liberal, assumption of bot counts.

Enjoy Ecuador!

Wish I was joking... But the first amendment no longer matters, judges orders no longer matter. Your right to a fair trial no longer exists. Your right to peaceful assembly no longer exists.

Take that as you will, but the federal government is no longer following the rules it's supposed to govern under. And your local police force will happily walk hand in hard with the fascists to violate your rights.

So, when do states stop sending federal taxes to the federal government then?

Even better, it's now a nice database of who companies and governments can go after when they want or need to!

Definitely never trip nearby while carrying some attack. I heard that does terrible things to cured epoxy and panel glue.

The Internet is just a bunch of servers my dude.

Someone has to pay for them, and all the other infrastructure around them. And with a large part of the world being on the internet a significant portion of their day the costs for even the most efficient centralized services running "at scale" (see: hundreds of millions MAU) are astronomical. In the tens of millions to hundreds of millions of $ annually, just an infrastructure, never mind human resources.

Almost none of these companies survive off of donations. Wikipedia stands out as one that does mainly because they host static content, which is incredibly cost efficient to serve up., and even then their costs are pretty astronomical (there are some debates around their costs of course).

Federated services have an asymmetric scaling problem. A linear growth in users results in a exponential growth in infrastructure costs. While centralized services tend to be almost the entire opposite of that and usually see logarithmic infrastructure costs against linear user growth. Where infrastructure costs are more efficient as their user base grows.

Federated services don't benefit from running at scale, the more they scale up the less benefit there is to scaling. It's a really shit situation to be in.

This is why the internet is largely just cyber feudalism. Because the only ones that can afford to host large scaled services for their users are the ones that are making money off of it. And that's for centralized services, never mind decentralized services which are unbelievably more expensive to host.

I'm coming at this from the standpoint of an engineer, I don't have answers or solutions, but the first thing we have to do in order to start figuring out solutions is to recognize the problem.

What most people in this thread don't realize is that what you're seeing right here is the problem with federated services in this day and age.

Federation protocols and systems just are not mature enough to scale.

Yes you will essentially always have to abandon ship anytime any federated service scales up it's user base. It will always be entirely unaffordable and unobtainable for randoms to host their own servers because the compute storage and networking requirements will far exceed what most can't afford.

As an aggregate federated services are always more expensive to host then centralized services. And that cost scales less efficiently than centralized services. Meaning that with linear user growth you get exponential cost growth, and the barrier for entry follows.

Which means that all federated services have to have centralization in order to scale. In their current form.

This is a really tough problem to solve and is going to take a lot of time and money to build good solutions for. Time and money that.... You guessed it, is largely funded by profits not donations.

And now we have looped back around.