zaphod @ zaphod @lemmy.ca

Just this guy, you know?

---

Read more

Posts

0

Comments

288

Joined

2 yr. ago

Doesn't help that an entire political party and their associated generation is allergic to paying for the infrastructure needed to care for their elderly asses. Elder care is first and foremost a funding problem, but no one wants to actually pay for it, elders included... until, that is, they suddenly realize that, fuck, no one else will pay for their mobility aids and home care.

Honestly the franchise is all over the place on this topic. Go back and watch S02E08 of ST:TNG, Unnatural Selection. No one getting arrested for genetic engineering there. My head canon is that by the time TNG is going genetic engineering has gone from truly taboo to just discouraged/not well accepted.

My vote: not if you can avoid it.

For casual home admins docker containers are mysterious black boxes that are difficult to configure and even worse to inspect and debug.

I prefer lightweight VMs hosting one or more services on an OS I understand and control (in my case Debian stable), and only use docker images as a way to quickly try out something new before commiting time to deploying it properly.

I wonder how long it'll take before we finally collectively reject the SV ethos that size is the only metric that matters and success is only achieved via monopoly...

There was a time when Usenet and BBBses and IRC was tiny and yet people still found value through community in those places.

Maybe, and I know this is a wild idea, platforms don't have to include every human on the planet to be meaningful, relevant, or valuable.

I honestly don't know.

But the point is missed payments are lower now than 3+ years ago. That they're increasing again is an interesting data point but it's a bit much to be setting off alarm bells. For all we know this is just part of the generalized ongoing reversion to the pre-pandemic mean.

So we're just going to ignore that debt dropped and savings rose substantially during COVID thanks to stimulus payments and this might just be a rebound?

Hell, they even bury this pretty damn important detail at the end of the piece:

Overall, missed mortgage payments are still lower than they were pre-pandemic

Also a) inflation has come back down and b) the economy is broadly healthy (minus the obvious and looming problems in housing and mortgages).

But just keep telling those doom and gloom stories, media. You'll be right eventually. Broken clocks and all that. #permabears

Stuffy and a thinly veiled metaphor for racists who object to mixed race relationships...

By your definition of harm, no artist creating non-material goods (books, movies, music, etc) could ever experience harm due to any one individual's actions. "I was never going to pay, so taking it without paying is a victim less crime," etc, etc.

The problem is this is clearly harmful in aggregate.

There are countless actions that, on an individual level are relatively harmless that we deem immoral because they'd be harmful if everyone did them: e.g. polluting.

But setting aside issues of harm--which is absolutely utilitarian--there are also many actions for which no objective "harm" can be identified but which we still deem inherently immoral. For example, if someone cheats on their spouse, and the spouse never finds out, most people I know would say that action is immoral irrespective of the lack of direct harm.

As for your last question, tbh I have no idea.

So then why post about it?

This isn't a utilitarian argument. It's a moral one.

They want to believe there's some moral dilemma here and they're, by gosh, trying their best to navigate it.

But the reality is: they want music, but they can't afford to pay artists in a way that's sustainable, so they're just taking it however they can get it and paying a pittance to make themselves feel a bit better.

So quit pretending. They've made their choice. Their priorities are clear.

I just can't afford it.

I'm poor and I listen to a lot of things. Buying all that isn't possible for me.

So basically: you can't afford the volume of product you want to consume at a price that's sustainable for artists, but want the product anyway and you see that as some unsolvable dilemma? Have I got that right?

Look, it sucks that you're in that financial situation. Not here to downplay that struggle. I've lived like that and it fuckin sucks.

But maybe the answer is to value the effort of musicians and either pay them for their work or consume less?

Not if you use a Hurricane Electric tunnel for ipv6 transit. My ISP hands out V6 addresses and I still use HE so I get a stable, globally routable /48 that moves with me (I had to switch ISPs recently and I just had to update my tunnel and everything just worked).

Lol, they're not? THIS WOULD BE YELLING AT YOU. This is me calmly explaining that "running for profit" and "running at a profit" isn't the same thing.

No it doesn't.

Syncthing only needs to remember the current state of the files/folders it's syncing. Not everything it's every sync'd.

It does that by either periodically scanning the filesystem to look for changes since it last scanned (based on the file creation and modification dates that are stored in the filesystem), or it registers with the operating system to receive events when files are created, modified, or deleted.

When Syncthing notices a create, update, or delete, it pushes those changes to the receiver and then updates it's record of the filesystem state accordingly.

It also pushes whole files, not deltas. So it doesn't care how the files changed, only that they did.

Even with hundreds of thousands of files to sync this is a relatively small amount of state as it's just file paths and their create/modify dates.

The client on the sender side (the phone) knows it sent the file. It doesn't care if the receiver side changed or deleted it. It sent the file. Its job is done. That's why the mode is called "Send Only".

Meanwhile the client on the receiver side (my NAS) never pushes changes back. It only responds to received sync instructions. That why the mode is called "Receive Only".

It's... all pretty simple. Not sure where the confusion lies?

Again, Syncthing supports one-way sync so allowing paperless to delete them and having that delete sync back to the phone is entirely optional.

That'd exactly what you want! When the file initially lands in the sync folder, Syncthing sends it to paperless. Paperless ingests it, deletes it, and it disappears from my phone, now stored in paperless. Exactly what I need.

If I wanted the files to stay on the phone I'd set up the phone as Send Only and the paperless side as Recieved Only.

Yup you're right. Meanwhile Newsweek (as reliable as they are...) reported on it but their dates are even less coherent.