FBXL Social

I dunno if anyone here is into it, but I just set up a minetest server at fbxl.net running mineclone2.

Nothing fancy or anything, but I wanted to host some game servers and that's one of the ones I think I'd like.

That looks like a distinction without a difference...

Like "oh, our brand is the annoyingly loud version of Harley Davidson" -- so it's just a Harley Davidson?

I've been happy with the last couple MSIs I bought. The last alienware I bought was.... it was fine.... I guess....

Sadly, even running android on the pinephone is an experience similar to my old galaxy s1. I'm glad we have it to help push the state of the art forward, but we really need a better hardware platform before we can even start to start considering daily driving linux on mobile.

But I'll say this: It's the next frontier, and when it starts to be even a little decent, I'm all-in.

tbf, apprenticeships are hard as fuck to get. You probably need to go to college to get your foot in the door.

Have to admit, you would have seen me with a mask in my car this morning.

But I'm sick with a chest infection and was on my way to the pharmacy.

I've been working on my own game engine for a long time now because even though it'll suck compared to a professional tool, and it's a lot more work, it's mine.

When you're dealing with someone else's stuff, they can change it at any time. That's the privilege of owning the thing. Anyone who has been around long enough knows what happens once you're reliant on one ecosystem -- the walls start caving in.

I'm sure I'm on any given block list, and I'm sure that I deserve it, but outsourcing thinking for yourself to others is always going to open you up for manipulation.

You don't even know these people who are putting names on lists, yet people blindly accept them as authoritative. Why wouldn't bad actors start injecting bad data into such a mindless automaton? Especially since one bad user can condemn everyone on an instance to the universal Blocklist.

Documenting stuff like this might be a good eyeopener for people who rely on such lists in such a way.

Interesting article concerning a possible future of automobiles:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANxhQ4wUiMQ

With a potential for deglobalization incoming, there's a chance that devices get simpler since they have to.

Honestly, having a king as a head of state figurehead in the English commonwealth doesn't mean anything. It just means that you have the parliament passing whatever laws and then a governor general to rubber stamp the laws. If the king's governor general ever refused to sign a law, it would be a major crisis.

Even conservatives hate the conservatives in the UK.

Viva was far too based to stay in Canada.

If enough people understood exactly just how much goes into getting the materials that we use for various things, the whole concept of "consuming to save the planet" would be laid bare for the farce it is. "Reduce" is the first one on the list for a reason.

It's so important we remember history existed more than 120 years ago.

I live in an area where you can drive for an entire day and it's nothing but trees. I totally agree with you that we need to fight to keep the earth green.

I think there's something we need to be careful of though, a friend of mine pointed it out: If we just min/max "more trees", then you end up engaging in certain practices where pack a bunch of the same trees in really tight in ways they wouldn't grow in nature because you can say you got more trees that way, but growing that way has negative consequences for the environment as well.

Monoculture, planting a bunch of one type of tree, for example, results in one bad disease for one species being able to wipe your entire forest. Canada's facing this in a lot of places right now, for example with the pine beetle outbreak harming British Columbia forests.

There's also practices like planting lots of trees really close together. In nature that's not how they grow, but it lets you say "Look at all the trees we planted!" but in the long term that's not a healthy forest and it's prone to things like fires as well.

The rock is produced by living things. Something creates some energy through photosynthesis, and either it creates a carbonate shell like coccolithophores or Coralline algaes, or ends up getting eaten by something else that goes up the food chain to feed something like a clam or a snail. What happens is those creatures live, grow, then die, and when they die their shells fall to the bottom of the sea and compact together, and these tiny creatures dying adds up over geological timeframes.

I ended up on a geological history of earth kick a few years ago, and stuff like this ended up being incredibly interesting because some really big things end up almost irrelevant to the geological record, but some really small things like microorganisms end up being immensely important.

The fact that the earth once had 22 atmospheres of CO2 and that's where life evolved, and all fossil fuels on earth were produced while life existed on the planet suggests that the calls for apocalypse might be greatly exaggerated. Burn every fossil fuel on earth and there's still mountains of carbonates that aren't going anywhere.

The carbonate is created when life takes the carbon out of the air somehow (it comes out using photosynthesis, but whether the life that did it or something that eats that primary consumer depends on which life it is) and then forms a hard shell. The hard shell is made out of carbonate, which when the creature dies falls to the bottom of the lake or ocean, creating the sedimentary layers of rock made out of carbonates.

It's important that we get the second step, because if you just pull carbon out of the air and use it or decompose it, then you're just taking it out and putting it back on non-geological timeframes. Cellulose was good because it didn't decompose for an era, but that era is long gone.

Much of it is in carbonate rock. There's entire mountains of the stuff.