[admin mode] ok, following up it's because of my pleroma cache, which had ballooned. Not sure exactly why it would all of a sudden, but by default it's on /tmp which is effectively a ramdrive. Without much ram, the ramdisk ended up getting absolutely hammered, leading to the OOM.
[admin mode] sorry for the downtime folks. Not sure why, but we ended up in an OOM condition on the reverse proxy. I've given it considerably more resources including multiple times more ram and multiple times more swap, and I'll keep an eye on it.
The reason for the long delay is that even my teamviewer backup method for dialing in to fix it was misbehaving. I had to get physical proximity to get in. I'll get that fixed up so it doesn't happen again.
The reason for the long delay is that even my teamviewer backup method for dialing in to fix it was misbehaving. I had to get physical proximity to get in. I'll get that fixed up so it doesn't happen again.
"Hudson died in April 2020 after leading police on a high-speed pursuit following a liquor store robbery. She was behind the wheel of a stolen Jeep when she crashed on Lagimodiere Boulevard.
An officer fired two bullets at her when the Jeep began to reverse as police approached on foot[...]"
It seems to me you'd have to be incredibly racist to think the reason she got shot was her race and not because she lead the police on a high speed pursuit following a liquor store robbery in a stolen jeep, then began to reverse as police approached on foot.
If I did that and I got shot, I'd be going "Yeah, that tracks" as I went down, not "it's cause I'm 1/256th Philippino, isn't it?"
An officer fired two bullets at her when the Jeep began to reverse as police approached on foot[...]"
It seems to me you'd have to be incredibly racist to think the reason she got shot was her race and not because she lead the police on a high speed pursuit following a liquor store robbery in a stolen jeep, then began to reverse as police approached on foot.
If I did that and I got shot, I'd be going "Yeah, that tracks" as I went down, not "it's cause I'm 1/256th Philippino, isn't it?"
I might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that America had alliances with monarchies within the lifetimes of the founders. Perhaps even the English. An alliance, even a strong one, isn't something that you could claim to be treasonous.
Of course, you used the word "allegiance", but it only makes sense as a misuse of the word. Typically, one country doesn't "make a military allegiance" to another, one could become a fiefdom of another, or a vassal state, or otherwise become subservient to the other, but that's a holistic state, not a purely military one.
Of course, you used the word "allegiance", but it only makes sense as a misuse of the word. Typically, one country doesn't "make a military allegiance" to another, one could become a fiefdom of another, or a vassal state, or otherwise become subservient to the other, but that's a holistic state, not a purely military one.
Back when I was a kid, we had these p things... p... parchment? No... Pterodactyls? No... Oh! Parents!
The people who are supposed to keep their kids off of social media if they don't want them on social media!
The people who are supposed to keep their kids off of social media if they don't want them on social media!
One thing I find kind of funny is the redditor take "noooo you can't have a 40TB hard drive, that's too biiiiig!"
You can keep everything on 128MB SD cards if you like, but as for me? I'm happy to have big hard drives. "Oh but you'll spend too long rebuilding if one fails!" I'll be ok. If you have any extra 40TB hard drives laying around and they give you the ick, then just give them to me. I'll give them a good home.
You can keep everything on 128MB SD cards if you like, but as for me? I'm happy to have big hard drives. "Oh but you'll spend too long rebuilding if one fails!" I'll be ok. If you have any extra 40TB hard drives laying around and they give you the ick, then just give them to me. I'll give them a good home.
No, not at all.
We live in a society full of people who press the blue button assuming everyone else will bail them out for their choice and thus be dragged down with them.
To live in a society of red button pressers is to live in a society where individuals take responsibility for their own well-being first and foremost, and more importantly not burden others with the risk of their existence. It's selfish to demand others put themselves at risk to validate you, when everyone could be just fine if they just make the obvious choice and protect themselves.
Morally speaking, forcing others to consider pressing blue and potentially dying just to save you is a sort of moral vanity. You press blue because it feels nice to press blue, but insodoing you perpetuate a potentially lethal plague, for no other reason than you think others might too.
But there are entire continents with billions of people who would laugh at the concept of pressing blue as well. You don't outnumber them, they won't press blue. That's the whole scenario in the west right now, when you think about it.
We live in a society full of people who press the blue button assuming everyone else will bail them out for their choice and thus be dragged down with them.
To live in a society of red button pressers is to live in a society where individuals take responsibility for their own well-being first and foremost, and more importantly not burden others with the risk of their existence. It's selfish to demand others put themselves at risk to validate you, when everyone could be just fine if they just make the obvious choice and protect themselves.
Morally speaking, forcing others to consider pressing blue and potentially dying just to save you is a sort of moral vanity. You press blue because it feels nice to press blue, but insodoing you perpetuate a potentially lethal plague, for no other reason than you think others might too.
But there are entire continents with billions of people who would laugh at the concept of pressing blue as well. You don't outnumber them, they won't press blue. That's the whole scenario in the west right now, when you think about it.
Morality or not, we've got two choices here: the "everyone who presses this button lives" button, and the "if I press this button there's a chance I die" button.
Literally everyone should press the red button. There should be ad campaigns about how much the red button ought to be the one you press. Pamphlets. Planes in the sky should write messages. Because every red button is a choice to live.
"My people would press the blue button because it makes us better people!" Great, but your community is in the minority and will not win the vote.
The only reason to press the blue button is you think someone else is stupid enough to press the blue button and you want to try to protect them from themselves, but then you become one of them. God sent you a speedboat, a helicopter, and a ship and you chose to drown.
Literally everyone should press the red button. There should be ad campaigns about how much the red button ought to be the one you press. Pamphlets. Planes in the sky should write messages. Because every red button is a choice to live.
"My people would press the blue button because it makes us better people!" Great, but your community is in the minority and will not win the vote.
The only reason to press the blue button is you think someone else is stupid enough to press the blue button and you want to try to protect them from themselves, but then you become one of them. God sent you a speedboat, a helicopter, and a ship and you chose to drown.
[admin mode] automated backups knocked out the database for no good reason I can tell. After the backup was complete I restarted everything and here we are.
My Ribdiculous Reincarnation is a surprisingly fun little anime so far. It's absurd and every episode they're playing with different art styles. It's about a weird perverted guy going through a bunch of reincarnations then recounting his experiences to a goddess of reincarnation.
Even if you agree with their missions, anyone with two eyes has to realize they're not acting in good faith.
Of course the defamation league or hate, hate, hate in the uk, they're all just organizations designed to keep running organizations.
Of course the defamation league or hate, hate, hate in the uk, they're all just organizations designed to keep running organizations.
ngl I'd buy an army jacket from goodwill, but I don't think our army has surplus of anything but embarassment.
I know -- when I'm closer to renewal I intend to look at the alternatives. But sometimes inertia keeps something around longer than it deserves.
Regarding Iran, it's tough because it's really easy to say "leave them alone they didn't do anything", what they did do a lot. They have done a lot. I left to their own devices they would continue to do a lot.
They fund terrorism abroad, including in many Western countries. The guy who started a war with them was someone attempted to assassinate, and then bragged about it. For people who support the war in Ukraine against Russia, Iran is a key of Russia and their source of both parts and expertise regarding drones. Iran is a key Ally of china, what are the sources of oil for that regime. The strait of Hormuz is a key choke point in Chinese supply chains and if China were to start that war in Taiwan they want, the street will become a critical strategic point.
I'm not going to go too far on the negatives of war because that's the story of the last 70 years. Pictures of media about Vietnam, Cuba, the Cold war, Iraq, and Afghanistan all layout in painstaking detail the reasons why war is bad. Therefore, the only discussion worth having at the moment seems to me to be why it might be different this time, or why it might not.
I'm taking a superpositional stance on this. Multiple things are true in this scenario, and the key that decide whether this war which contains both good and bad element has generally positive outcomes. Are the keys going to be whether is short, whether it is effective, and what those effects might be.
But the war in Iran definitely doesn't look like the war in Iraq at this moment, at least to me. Especially is the regime change is just making sure the new people stepping into the regime have a healthy fear of God.
They fund terrorism abroad, including in many Western countries. The guy who started a war with them was someone attempted to assassinate, and then bragged about it. For people who support the war in Ukraine against Russia, Iran is a key of Russia and their source of both parts and expertise regarding drones. Iran is a key Ally of china, what are the sources of oil for that regime. The strait of Hormuz is a key choke point in Chinese supply chains and if China were to start that war in Taiwan they want, the street will become a critical strategic point.
I'm not going to go too far on the negatives of war because that's the story of the last 70 years. Pictures of media about Vietnam, Cuba, the Cold war, Iraq, and Afghanistan all layout in painstaking detail the reasons why war is bad. Therefore, the only discussion worth having at the moment seems to me to be why it might be different this time, or why it might not.
I'm taking a superpositional stance on this. Multiple things are true in this scenario, and the key that decide whether this war which contains both good and bad element has generally positive outcomes. Are the keys going to be whether is short, whether it is effective, and what those effects might be.
But the war in Iran definitely doesn't look like the war in Iraq at this moment, at least to me. Especially is the regime change is just making sure the new people stepping into the regime have a healthy fear of God.
FBXL has always been a FreeBASIC site, first and foremost. If you go to fbxl.net, you'll get to see the ancient FBXL magazine which hasn't been updated in 20 years.
So I'm proud to announce the first fruits of a major project I've been working on for several months now:
https://deb.fbxl.net/
I've been creating a build environment that lets me build for every platform FreeBASIC supports, and then some.
Linux (currently Debian/Ubuntu)
cygwin (as a package)
mingw (as a universal installer)
freebsd
netbsd
openbsd
dragonfly
solaris
macosx (Intel only)
And for the first time ever, FreeBASIC is packaged for Haiku.
As far as I know, these should all install, and they should also support gfxlib.
I'm pretty proud of it. I believe I'm the single person who has compiled to more FreeBASIC platforms than anyone else at this point.
Wherever I could, I also tried to have them bring in whatever dependencies are required.
Can I guarantee they're going to work perfectly? No. I've tested them, but the focus was getting the full matrix built and packaged. There may still be rough edges.
So I'm proud to announce the first fruits of a major project I've been working on for several months now:
https://deb.fbxl.net/
I've been creating a build environment that lets me build for every platform FreeBASIC supports, and then some.
Linux (currently Debian/Ubuntu)
cygwin (as a package)
mingw (as a universal installer)
freebsd
netbsd
openbsd
dragonfly
solaris
macosx (Intel only)
And for the first time ever, FreeBASIC is packaged for Haiku.
As far as I know, these should all install, and they should also support gfxlib.
I'm pretty proud of it. I believe I'm the single person who has compiled to more FreeBASIC platforms than anyone else at this point.
Wherever I could, I also tried to have them bring in whatever dependencies are required.
Can I guarantee they're going to work perfectly? No. I've tested them, but the focus was getting the full matrix built and packaged. There may still be rough edges.
The asymmetry of how rules are applied in this conflict is sickening.
The things that have been alleged and not disputed or have been proven or even bragged about by one side are so beyond the pale that anyone claiming to support them is not anything western. You can't be a feminist or a progressive, or a conservative Christian, or a libertarian or neoliberal, and still support the things those groups have done, and are openly happy to continue doing.
The things that have been alleged and not disputed or have been proven or even bragged about by one side are so beyond the pale that anyone claiming to support them is not anything western. You can't be a feminist or a progressive, or a conservative Christian, or a libertarian or neoliberal, and still support the things those groups have done, and are openly happy to continue doing.
I came up with an idea this morning about "cultural Lysenkoism".
Lysenkoism was an alternative to genetics and natural selection that was developed in the Soviet Union because genetics and natural selection ideologically cannot fit within socialism because it implies that certain people are naturally better or naturally worse. As an example of the pseudoscience and how it contrasts with science, the proposal was that rather than the children of two organisms carrying attributes that are related to their genetic code and therefore bounded within that, that instead their attributes are set exclusively by the conditions of the two parents at conception, so for example if somebody was naturally overweight and short but they worked out very hard and became skinny for a short period of time, and maybe we're surgically altered so that they were taller, then their offspring would be tall and skinny rather than short and fat.
Here I am taking that concept of Lysenkoism and I'm transposing it into contemporary media culture.
A lot of things have been true isn't for a very long time in the in the media industry, and for good reason: they are true. Things like "sex sells and attractive actors and actresses can sell a movie", or "it is important to make a good movie because otherwise the audience's will stop showing up", or "ultimately it is the customer who makes decisions about what to watch", or "the customer is always right in matters of taste"
A lot of postmodernists have made it into Hollywood, and many of these longstanding truisms are not politically acceptable for their ideology. Attractive actors and actresses don't draw people to movies, they are problematic and dangerous. Having control of a property is more important than what you do with the property because if you have the property then you have the power over the audience because you have the thing that has power. If you are in a position of power then you have the capacity to bully audiences into watching what you want them to watch rather than what they want to watch. And the customer is not always right in matters of taste, and if they want something that doesn't align with your personal ideology and you are in a position of power then it is just and effective to try to change the audience by giving them something that they don't want because you know better than them.
That's not the only precepts of it, I suspect that you could write books on the topic. However, once I start laying it out like this I think that it becomes intuitive for anyone who has followed Hollywood in the last few years, or video games for that matter, and we could quibble about the micro definitions of a certain elements, but generally speaking many people would immediately identify that there was something to this.
Lysenkoism ultimately ended up killing a lot of people because when you were growing grain, it is important to understand the reality of growing grain rather than what ideologically would be convenient. Likewise, cultural Lysenkoism is killing entire industries because the model's being used to produce new video games or movies or music don't align with the reality of creating those things and actually making them operable. It didn't happen right away, because the real world isn't digital, it is analog and it has time constants and sometimes you can make a mistake and it takes 10 years to truly see how badly you've messed up, but people will claim that the video game industry is making more money than ever before, but the reality is that companies that existed for decades are closing up shop because they can't produce successful products under the tenants of cultural Lysenkoism. They end up chasing a false idol of modern audiences which don't exist outside of very limited conclaves, and produce things that cost more and more money, but ultimately struggle to be profitable at all because audiences don't actually want any of this.
Another interesting parallel is that this is in fact enforced. Whether it is through ESG and DEI initiatives which limit what is acceptable, or it is through companies like SBI which are now known to be funded by nation states presumably in pursuit of ideological outcomes, the powers that be have a certain direction that they want things to go in. The problem is that eventually these industries need customers. Even if the government ends up subsidizing 100% of the media industry and video game industry, it will employ a lot of people but there will be no power in those industries because nobody will consume the content any longer. We are in fact seeing that, where audiences are moving on.
Lysenkoism was an alternative to genetics and natural selection that was developed in the Soviet Union because genetics and natural selection ideologically cannot fit within socialism because it implies that certain people are naturally better or naturally worse. As an example of the pseudoscience and how it contrasts with science, the proposal was that rather than the children of two organisms carrying attributes that are related to their genetic code and therefore bounded within that, that instead their attributes are set exclusively by the conditions of the two parents at conception, so for example if somebody was naturally overweight and short but they worked out very hard and became skinny for a short period of time, and maybe we're surgically altered so that they were taller, then their offspring would be tall and skinny rather than short and fat.
Here I am taking that concept of Lysenkoism and I'm transposing it into contemporary media culture.
A lot of things have been true isn't for a very long time in the in the media industry, and for good reason: they are true. Things like "sex sells and attractive actors and actresses can sell a movie", or "it is important to make a good movie because otherwise the audience's will stop showing up", or "ultimately it is the customer who makes decisions about what to watch", or "the customer is always right in matters of taste"
A lot of postmodernists have made it into Hollywood, and many of these longstanding truisms are not politically acceptable for their ideology. Attractive actors and actresses don't draw people to movies, they are problematic and dangerous. Having control of a property is more important than what you do with the property because if you have the property then you have the power over the audience because you have the thing that has power. If you are in a position of power then you have the capacity to bully audiences into watching what you want them to watch rather than what they want to watch. And the customer is not always right in matters of taste, and if they want something that doesn't align with your personal ideology and you are in a position of power then it is just and effective to try to change the audience by giving them something that they don't want because you know better than them.
That's not the only precepts of it, I suspect that you could write books on the topic. However, once I start laying it out like this I think that it becomes intuitive for anyone who has followed Hollywood in the last few years, or video games for that matter, and we could quibble about the micro definitions of a certain elements, but generally speaking many people would immediately identify that there was something to this.
Lysenkoism ultimately ended up killing a lot of people because when you were growing grain, it is important to understand the reality of growing grain rather than what ideologically would be convenient. Likewise, cultural Lysenkoism is killing entire industries because the model's being used to produce new video games or movies or music don't align with the reality of creating those things and actually making them operable. It didn't happen right away, because the real world isn't digital, it is analog and it has time constants and sometimes you can make a mistake and it takes 10 years to truly see how badly you've messed up, but people will claim that the video game industry is making more money than ever before, but the reality is that companies that existed for decades are closing up shop because they can't produce successful products under the tenants of cultural Lysenkoism. They end up chasing a false idol of modern audiences which don't exist outside of very limited conclaves, and produce things that cost more and more money, but ultimately struggle to be profitable at all because audiences don't actually want any of this.
Another interesting parallel is that this is in fact enforced. Whether it is through ESG and DEI initiatives which limit what is acceptable, or it is through companies like SBI which are now known to be funded by nation states presumably in pursuit of ideological outcomes, the powers that be have a certain direction that they want things to go in. The problem is that eventually these industries need customers. Even if the government ends up subsidizing 100% of the media industry and video game industry, it will employ a lot of people but there will be no power in those industries because nobody will consume the content any longer. We are in fact seeing that, where audiences are moving on.