Federating small communities
tal @ tal @kbin.social Posts 11Comments 458Joined 2 yr. ago
tal @ tal @kbin.social
Posts
11
Comments
458
Joined
2 yr. ago
I'm not a tankie, but I don't think that the idea of justifying political repression in Russia is likely to be much of a challenge. The Bolsheviks justified single-party rule and their own political repressions for a long time. If you're a tankie, you're presumably already willing to accept that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanguardism
Vanguardism in the context of Leninist revolutionary struggle, relates to a strategy whereby the most class-conscious and politically "advanced" sections of the proletariat or working class, described as the revolutionary vanguard, form organizations to advance the objectives of communism.
The notion of a 'vanguard', as used by Lenin before 1917, did not necessarily imply single-party rule. Lenin considered the Social-Democrats (Bolsheviks) the leading elements of a multi-class (and multi-party) democratic struggle against Tsarism.[7] For a period after the October Revolution, the Bolsheviks (now renamed the Communist Party) operated in the soviets, trade unions, and other working-class mass organisations with other revolutionary parties, such as Mensheviks, Social-Revolutionaries and anarcho-communists, and local soviets often elected non-Bolshevik majorities.[8] Lenin did consider the Bolsheviks the vanguard insofar as they were the most consistent defenders of Soviet power (which he considered the dictatorship of the proletariat or 'Commune-state').[9] However, the situation changed drastically during the Russian Civil War and economic collapse, which decimated the working class and its independent institutions, and saw the development of irreconcilable conflicts between the Bolsheviks and their rivals. At the 10th Congress of the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks) in 1921, the Party made the de facto reality de jure by outlawing opposition parties and formalising single-Party rule.[10]
The impetus for having a vanguard party was used by the Bolsheviks to justify their suppression of other parties. Their rationale was that since they were the vanguard of the proletariat, their right to rule could not be legitimately questioned.
Starting this year, internet platforms must verify new users' identities via state-approved systems, before granting access. VPN circumvention advice will constitute a crime, certain Gmail use will be banned, and non-state-approved hosting companies will be rendered illegal.
Since its invasion of Ukraine in February, Russian Members of Parliament and lawmakers have taken turns to see who can come up with the most aggressive anti-Western legislative proposals.
Maybe "anti-Western" isn't the best term. That kind of seems likely to hurt the Russian public more than the West.
Speaking generally about ads, the issue is that people (a) don't like ads, but (b) also don't like paying for things that could be ad-supported. And the money for things that are ad-supported is going to come from one place or another, or they won't be done.
Wanting to get rid of ads is a legitimate preference -- but I'm saying that that probably comes with paying for something that wasn't paid for before.
Well, you've got USB and Bluetooth. If you're willing to carry a separate keyboard, you can get anything from large keyboards to folding, pocket-size ones.
Maybe this is just my own preference talking here, because I don't like wireless charging myself, but my impression is that a major distinguishing factor of OnePlus is their fast charging, and wireless charging can push considerably less power than current OnePlus phones can intake via USB PD, even prior to the efficiency loss from wireless.
[continued from parent]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-propelledanti-aircraftweapon
The introduction of jet engines and the subsequent rough doubling of aircraft speeds greatly reduced the effectiveness of the SPAAG against attack aircraft.[dubious – discuss] A typical SPAAG round might have a muzzle velocity on the order of 1,000 metres per second (3,300 ft/s) and might take as long as two to three seconds to reach a target at its maximum range. An aircraft flying at 1,000 kilometres per hour (620 mph) is moving at a rate of about 280 metres per second (920 ft/s). This means the aircraft will have moved hundreds of meters during the flight time of the shells, greatly complicating the aiming problem to the point where close passes were essentially impossible to aim using manual gunsights. This speed also allowed the aircraft to rapidly fly out of range of the guns; even if the aircraft passes directly over the SPAAG, it would be within its firing radius for under 30 seconds.
SPAAG development continued through the early 1950s with ever-larger guns, improving the range and allowing the engagement to take place at longer distances where the crossing angle was smaller and aiming was easier. Examples including the 40 mm U.S. M42 Duster and the 57 mm Soviet ZSU-57-2. However, both were essentially obsolete before they entered service, and found employment solely in the ground-support role. The M42 was introduced to the Vietnam War to counter an expected North Vietnamese air offensive, but when this failed to materialize it was used as an effective direct-fire weapon. The ZSU-57 found similar use in the Yugoslav Wars, where its high-angle fire was useful in the mountainous terrain.
By the late 1950s, the US Army had given up on the SPAAG concept, considering all gun-based weapons to be useless against modern aircraft. This belief was generally held by many forces, and the anti-aircraft role turned almost exclusively to missile systems. The Soviet Union remained an outlier, beginning the development of a new SPAAG in 1957, which emerged as the ZSU-23-4 in 1965. This system included search-and-track radars, fire control, and automatic gun-laying, greatly increasing its effectiveness against modern targets. The ZSU-23 proved very effective when used in concert with SAMs; the presence of SAMs forced aircraft to fly low to avoid their radars, placing them within range of the ZSUs.
The success of the ZSU-23 led to a resurgence of SPAAG development. This was also prompted by the introduction of attack helicopters in the 1970s, which could hide behind terrain and then "pop up" for an attack lasting only a few tens of seconds; missiles were ineffective at low altitudes, while the helicopters would often be within range of the guns for a rapid counterattack. Notable among these later systems is the German Gepard, the first western SPAAG to offer performance equal to or better than the ZSU. This system was widely copied in various NATO forces.
SPAAG development continues, with many modern examples often combining both guns and short-range missiles. Examples include the Soviet/Russian Tunguska-M1, which supplanted the ZSU-23 in service, the newer versions of the Gepard, the Chinese Type 95 SPAAA, and the British Marksman turret, which can be used on a wide variety of platforms. Some forces, like the US Army and USMC have mostly forgone self-propelled guns in favor of systems with short-range infrared-guided surface-to-air missiles in the AN/TWQ-1 Avenger and M6 Linebacker, which do not require radar to be accurate and are generally more reliable and cost-effective to field, though their ability to provide ground support is more limited. The U.S. Army did use the M163 VADS and developed the prototype design of the M247 Sergeant York.
Russia has been using this approach for a while with the cheap Iranian Shahed-136 loitering munitions.
The problem is that self-propelled antiaircraft guns, SPAAGs, are a cheap way to take down relatively low and slow weapons like this.
In the US, we mostly shifted away from SPAAGs to surface-to-air missiles when aircraft shifted to jets; SPAAGs were fairly obsolete against them. By this point, our SPAAGs have all been out of service -- and not just out of service, but dismantled and sold off for parts -- for decades, and the fact that Germany was somewhat slow to abandon them made their Gepard SPAAGs
useful in Ukraine against Shahed-136s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M163VADS
The M163 Vulcan Air Defense System (VADS) is a self-propelled anti-aircraft gun (SPAAG) that was used by the United States Army.
With the wider use of non-jet-based low-and-slow cheap unmanned weapons, the SPAAG is better-suited as a counter to those.
However, the Soviet Union was slower to abandon SPAAGs, and Russia tends to warehouse a lot of older weapons, moreso than we do. They are probably better positioned to counter such weapons then we are to provide Ukraine with air defenses against them. We've mostly been relying on sending elderly Hawk SAMs, which are obsolete against current aircraft but work against Shahed-136s and are numerous enough that they'll last for a while.
[continued in child]
There's apparently a humanist logo used in Australia that has five stars (from the Australian flag), though they aren't really above the person's head:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CouncilofAustralianHumanistSocieties
goes looking
It looks like the Paralympics don't do an annual thing; they've changed a few times, but with the exception of the first (which was three wheelchair wheels), it's been a combination of three swooshes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paralympicsymbols
It doesn't look like it's the Commonwealth Games either:
https://logos.fandom.com/wiki/Category:CommonwealthGames
I tried doing a Google Images search for "athletic competition stars logo", but didn't turn anything likely up. The closest I was able to find was stock vector art:
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/shield-stars-man-catching-ball-american-1195741933
https://colorlib.com/wp/all-olympic-logos-1924-2022/
I don't think that it's an official Olympics logo. The closest is Barcelona Summer Olympics 1992, and it's not that similar.
2003-2016 logo for South Carolina Educational Television?
https://logos.fandom.com/wiki/SouthCarolinaEducationalTelevision#2003%E2%80%932016
Bottom left corner of the screen in the recorded video, or on the tape itself?
.png/revision/latest?cb=20181003111613){kind=link}
Do you have a country or rough timeframe (like, decade) where you might have seen it?
Yeah, I don't think I really agree with the author as to the difficulty with dig. Maybe it could be better, but as protocols and tools go, I'd say that dig and DNS is an example where a tool does a pretty good job of coverage. Maybe not DNSSEC, dunno about how dig does there, and knowing to use +norecurse is maybe not immediately obvious, but I can list a lot of network protocols for which I wish that there were the equivalent to dig.
However, a lot of what of what the author seems to be complaining about is not really stuff at the network level, but the stuff happening on the host level. And it is true that there are a lot of parts in there if one considers name resolution as a whole, not just DNS, and no one tool that can look at the whole process.
If I'm doing a resolution with Firefox, I've got a browser cache for name resolutions independently of the OS. I may be doing DNS over HTTP, and that may always happen or be a fallback. I may have a caching nameserver at my OS level. There's the /etc/hosts file. There's configuration in /etc/resolv.conf. There's NIS/yp. Windows has its own name resolution stuff hooked into the Windows domains stuff and several mechanisms to do name resolution, whether via broadcasts without a domain controller or with a DC whether that's present; Apple has Bonjour and more-generally there's zeroconf. It's not immediately clear to someone the order of this or a tool that can monitor the whole process end to end -- these are indeed independent systems that kind of grew organically.
Maybe it'd be nice to have an API to let external software initiate name resolutions via the browser and get information about what's going on, and then have a single "name resolution diagnostic" tool that could span multiple of these name resolution systems, describe what's happening and help highlight problems. I can say that gethostbyname() could also use a diagnostic call to extract more information about what a resolution attempt attempted to do and why it failed; libc doesn't expose a lot of useful diagnostic information to the application, though libc does know what it is doing in a resolution attempt.
make dig’s output a little more friendly. If I were better at C programming, I might try to write a dig pull request that adds a +human flag to dig that formats the long form output in a more structured and readable way, maybe something like this:
Okay, fair enough.
One quick note on dig: newer versions of dig do have a +yaml output format which feels a little clearer to me, though it’s too verbose for my taste (a pretty simple DNS response doesn’t fit on my screen)
Man, that is like the opposite approach to what you want. If YAML output is easier to read, that's incidental; that's intended to be machine-readable, a stable output format.
The important thing to remember is that if you add too much of everything, it all cancels out and is just right.
https://lemmy.fediverse.observer/list
https://kbin.fediverse.observer/list
If you require open signups and then sort by number of users, ascending, that's an auto-generated list of small instances that (presumably) are looking for users.