Huh. I don't remember this part of The Lorax...
tal @ tal @kbin.social Posts 11Comments 458Joined 2 yr. ago
tal @ tal @kbin.social
Posts
11
Comments
458
Joined
2 yr. ago
Wait a minute. I don't remember the Lorax having four eyes.
googles
Yeah.
Not to mention the entire UNIX security model is severely limited. Being limited to 3 permissions for 3 different classes of users
I was using FACLs on Unix systems twenty years ago, and they were not new then.
Here's a basic introduction to the situation on Linux.
I am going to guess that for most applications where one might use an AirTag, it's also viable to just use a GPS logger. There isn't going to be a way to pick that up.
Duplicity uses rsync internally for efficient transport. I have used that. I'm presently using rdiff-backup, driven by backupninja out of a cron job, to backup to a local hard drive and which does incremental backups (which would address @Nr97JcmjjiXZud's concern). That also uses rsync. There's also rsbackup, which also uses rsync and I have not used.
Two caveats I'd note that may or may not be a concern for one's specific use case (which apply to rdiff-backup, and I believe both also apply to the other two rsync-based solutions above, though it's been a while since I've looked at them, so don't quote me on that):
- One property that a backup system can have is to make backups immutable -- so that only the backup system has the ability to purge old backups. That could be useful if, for example, the system with the data one is preserving is broken into -- you may not want someone compromising the backed up system to be able to wipe the old backups. Rdiff-backup expects to be able to connect to the backup system and write to it. Unless there's some additional layer of backups that the backup server is doing, that may be a concern for you.
- Rdiff-backup doesn't do dedup of data. That is, if you have a 1GB file named "A" and one byte in that file changes, it will only send over a small delta and will efficiently store that delta. But if you have another 1GB file named "B" that is identical to "A" in content, rdiff-backup won't detect that and only use 1GB of storage -- it will require 2GB and store the identical files separately. That's not a huge concern for me, since I'm backing up a one-user system and I don't have a lot of duplicate data stored, but for someone else's use case, that may be important. Possibly more-importantly to OP, since this is offsite and bandwidth may be a constraining factor, the 1GB file will be retransferred. I think that this also applies to renames, though I could be wrong there (i.e. you'd get that for free with dedup; I don't think that it looks at inode numbers or something to specially try to detect renames).
Not quite the same thing, but:
https://lemmy.fediverse.observer/list
One lemmy server is registered as using Vietnamese language (in Germany).
https://keylog.zip/?dataType=Post&listingType=Local&page=1&sort=Active
That has only two comments, neither of which seem to be Vietnamese.
One lemmy server is registered as being in Vietnam.
It does explicitly say in the description say that it is hosted in Vietnam, and people are clearly talking about Vietnamese stuff (in English), but is low traffic and has only two communities (with tens of subscribers).
There are no kbin servers presently registered as using Vietnamese language or as being in Vietnam.
I think that it's going to be a tough sell to the Kiwis. Until 12 years ago, New Zealand didn't even allow US nuclear-powered warships in her waters, because there was that much concern from the Kiwi public about them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANZUS
New Zealand was suspended from ANZUS in 1986 as it initiated a nuclear-free zone in its territorial waters; in late 2012, New Zealand lifted a ban on visits by United States warships leading to a thawing in tensions. New Zealand maintains a nuclear-free zone as part of its foreign policy and is partially suspended from ANZUS, as the United States maintains an ambiguous policy whether or not the warships carry nuclear weapons and operates numerous nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and submarines; however New Zealand resumed key areas of the ANZUS treaty in 2007.[3][4]
ANZUS was overshadowed in late 2021 by AUKUS, a trilateral security pact between Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. It involves cooperation in nuclear submarines that New Zealand will not support. Australia and New Zealand, "are poles apart in terms of the way they see the world....I think this alliance underlines that they’re going in very different directions,” said Geoffrey Miller, an international analyst at the Democracy Project in New Zealand.[5]
AUKUS is specifically about submarine tech, not just tolerating someone else's subs passage. The Aussie government may have wanted nuclear vessels and decided that the public was finally sufficiently on-board, but New Zealand has had more opposition than Australia has.
Oh, you're right. About 25 years back. I'm pretty sure that it was its debut that I remember, though, because I saw it in the context of other news talking about it being a new novelty, and I'm pretty sure that they were talking about its start.
I don't see the argument for it. The same bar doesn't apply to humans who train their minds on other human works.
If the Kremlin wanted more wealth and power over a larger number of people and is willing to take in immigration and able to attract people, instead of trying to annex neighboring countries and their not-too-keen-on-being-annexed populations, they could just leverage immigration. Could just cut the whole annexing thing out of the equation and still grow.
I'm not at all sure that the technology is there today (which the guy even says himself).
But I do believe that there will come a point in time where it is, if it is not today.
However, from a business standpoint, I think that the problem in making a compelling personalized newsfeed is less generating personalized video and audio and more in building a profile and determining what content the individual wants to see.
Thing is, Google is already in the business of profiling people and building personalized news recommendations, with Google News. And they have a lot more data on people and probably the individual reading the thing to use to feed any algorithms to generate recommendations. So I think that it's probably gonna be difficult to enter that field.
That being said, I dunno. There's Naked News, which has the gimmick of offering a nude anchor doing the news. I remember thinking, some fifteen years back when it came out, "that won't last", but it's still around today. Maybe it's possible that there's room for a company to specialize in the video presentation of the news, that there is room to really add value in how news is presented.
Here's the spot.
It looks like there are two roads and the village is kind of at their cross, so it's probably people trying to get from Point A to Point B rather than to the village. Doesn't look like there's presently an easy way to drive around the outside of the village.
The roads in the village don't look to me to be well-suited to high-speed traffic at all. They are narrow, and the place is full of blind corners, with very little frontage space between the buildings and the street. I would bet that the village road network and building layout has been there since before cars were around.
Maybe add a bypass road that goes around the village further away so that through traffic can still get through quickly and so that people in the village don't have high-speed traffic going down their main street.
Oh, that's also a thought. IIRC Intel tried trademarking the letter "i" at one point and the USPTO wouisn't allow it, so I dunno if a single-character trademark is considered distinctive enough. Xorg's has more stuff to it than just the base letter.
There are still apparently some rabid Hydrox fans around.
It looks kind of similar to Xorg's logo to me.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/90/X.OrgLogo.svg/1279px-X.OrgLogo.svg.png
I mean, his is embosssed, but if I were choosing a logo for my new brand "x.com", I don't think I'd choose something that looks a lot like x.org's logo.
I'm not actually sure that there is a home on Earth 6000 miles away from a furcon.
googles
https://furrycons.com/calendar/map/
https://www.treehugger.com/most-remote-places-on-earth-4869276
Yeah, nowhere in the Northern Hemisphere is gonna qualify.
If you live on Tristan Da Cunha, the "most remote island on Earth inhabited by humans" in the South Atlantic, you're 5,984 mi from SloFluffCon 2023 in Celje, Slovenia, so even that wouldn't quite do it.
I don't think that you can count somewhere like the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station, because nobody actually permanently lives there.
looks further
Pitcairn Island isn't even close, only about 3,520 mi from Confuror 2023 in Guadalajara, Mexico.
While I realize that there are people for whom having a camera aimed at themselves is really important, I have to say that I have virtually never used the self-facing camera on a phone.
Honestly, every videoconference I've ever done on a computer for work could have really been done just fine with a audio-only call too.
I'd be pretty comfortable getting a phone that just drops the self-facing camera. Could just use a USB-attached webcam if I ever ran into a very rare situation where I really critically wanted the ability to videoconference on a phone.
Now, okay, that's not true for everyone. For some people's uses, having a self-facing camera is legitimately important. But at least for my own uses, I'd rather just have the extra pixels.
While I realize that there are people for whom having a camera aimed at themselves is really important, I have to say that I have virtually never used the self-facing camera on a phone.
Honestly, every videoconference I've ever done on a computer for woek could have really been done just fine with a audio-only call too.
I'd be pretty comfortable getting a phone that just drops the self-facing camera. Could just use a USB-attached webcam if I ever ran into a very rare situation where I really critically wanted the ability to videoconference on a phone.
Now, okay, that's not true for everyone. For some people's uses, having a self-facing camera is legitimately important. But at least for my own uses, I'd rather just have the extra pixels.
I kind of am in the "large phone" camp too, but one point I'd bring up: present-day women's fashion tends to not be as friendly to large pockets. If someone is female and doesn't want to use a handbag for their phone, small size may be a big deal. It's something I try to be sensitive of when I see someone complaining about large phones. If you're a guy, getting clothing with large pockets is easy. If you're a girl, it's a larger constraint.
I've seen a lot of women in tight jeans with small pockets and the majority of a large phone hanging out the top of the pocket.
I remember reading that having storage that went beneath skirts, with a slit to access it, used to historically be really common, but the 20th century shift in fashion towards more body-fitting dresses and then pants kind of killed that.
googles
Yeah.
Do you find it frustrating that dresses and skirts hardly ever have pockets?
Even pants and jackets for women often don't have pockets you can actually put things in.
Clothes with pockets are a relatively new phenomenon, National Galley of Victoria textile and fashions curator Paola Di Trocchio said.
"In the 17th century women and men actually had external pockets," she told ABC Radio Melbourne's Hilary Harper.
While women who worked would wear these pockets on the outside of their clothing for ease of access, others wore the pockets under their skirts.
The large skirts in fashion at the time meant people could hide a lot in their pockets.
By this time men's clothes often included sewn-in pockets, because although women had begun to go out in public more "it was the men, typically, who handled money".
Women would often carry their items in a tiny bag, called a reticule, which eventually grew to a sensible size and became the modern handbag.
As for the future, Ms Di Trocchio said there's hope for pocket-lovers, with pockets potentially becoming larger and more common.
"Because we've got smartphones ... either our handbags or our pockets probably, design-wise, will respond because that's what humans are asking for, that's what they're desiring."
I have an Android tablet that I mostly use for reading text or watching movies sometimes. I do wind up using my laptop more.
I suspect that a laptop+phone might cover a lot of what she's talking about better than a tablet.
It took Google more than a decade to dedicate some development resources to larger screens
A laptop will generally beat a tablet on screen size.
I’d still love to see the full desktop Chrome experience on tablets — rendering, extensions, search engines, and all that
Well, there's an easy way to get the desktop Chrome experience.
Multi-window support has been a staple feature of Android’s history
Also hard to compete with a desktop on.
Landscape mode: Near useless on phones, a default on tablets
Also true of laptops.
Huh. How does that work? I mean, what do you gain from having two tubes feeding into one eye?
googles
https://www.athlonoutdoors.com/article/night-vision-nods-pro-con/
Oh, okay. It's to give a horizontally-wider field of view. I guess that makes sense.