no reason you couldn't implement a voice bridge either, both have open communication standards. There's existing bots/libs out there for similar things already. Probably wouldn't even be all that hard to implement.
i dont think the software is "dead dead" but i think it's dead from the aspect that it seems to be stagnant, which to be clear, isn't a bad thing. It just feels a little bit like it's still 2012 everytime you open mumble.
It's a tad bit disappointing, considering i love it so much. But i don't think anything else will properly replace it.
it's a systemd unit on my side, so i've got logging and potential to implement reporting if i desired, but frankly it's not worth the effort, i just check to see if the drives have roughly the same data on them every so often, because rsync is handling the rest for me, as well as systemd.
I should probably set up proper smart reporting, but i'm lazy and don't want to setup and email server lol.
openbsd seems interesting to me, it's entire existence seems to be "secure OS" and i think that's rather respectable. I'll get around to messing with it some day.
yeah, i was just pointing out that we've seen desktop chips in laptops before, it's not common, but it has happened, and will likely continue to happen.
what they're saying is that you're pointing out that this is whats happening, and that this is another thing related to this thing via a tangential connection.
You have no idea who owns those cows, or if those cows even exist, or if those are even the names of those cows. Literally all you know is that that's what it says. We have nothing that should lead us to a conclusion of anything other than "huh, they used old human names, that are female, probably because naming non human things, human names would be weird, and probably female, because well, the animals are female, though since it's not explicitly human animals, they don't need explicitly human names, so quite a few of them are just, weird."
This is like seeing 911 happen, and then seeing another building collapse somewhere else due to bad maintenance and going "must be terrorism"
idk i think i'd be more concerned about the fact that humans are literally willing to round up hundreds of thousands of animals for produce and food, and feeling no remorse for it, rather than the slight parallel between what is literally comparable to the holocaust (except it's cows and beef/milk, instead of jews and hitler) than the very generalized problem that society has towards women specifically.
Like don't get me wrong here, i don't think you're wrong, i just also don't think that this is probably the place and time to be talking about it like it's some sort of moral fixation. When there is literally a better one to use.
Regardless, whenever shit like this happens, there is almost always some funny shit that shows up on e6 in about a week. Same thing happened with the recent bear posting.
well, after having thought about it for hours. And i really mean hours (please help me, also don't mind me, i'm just autistic as fuck and think about these sorts of things a lot)
I have finally put together my ultimate conclusion on this topic. And it is as follows:
For starters, why am i in the woods? Presumably in this example i was just teleported out there at random, with one other entity, either a human or a bear. Now idk much about bear psychology, but if i were a bear, and a human popped up out of nowhere in front of me, i would lose my shit. So chances are im probably going to die.
As for a human, assuming a statistically random sample from the world, lets assume for the sake of this example, someone from within the same geographical area that i am in, because it makes logical sense for the statement here. The chances of them being 1. significant deviant enough that the second they see me, and decide they want to be a problem, is low enough that i'm willing to take it. Paired with the fact that often times abusers and rapists tend to be people you already know (it's just a basic fun fact about being around people) and in this case, it's probably someone i've never seen before, much less interacted with. I'm assuming the chances of me getting my shit fucked up are probably between 0-5% i feel like that's pretty reasonable. i can't imagine much more than like 10% of any given western population are active rapists. So we'll go with that. And like i said the bear? Probably going to flip it's shit. And even if it doesn't it's still gotta be higher than 10% i would assume.
Now, moving on to the secondary factors, we're lost in a forest. The very obvious factor here is that being there with another individual greatly increases your odds of being found/getting out, both due to collective knowledge accumulation between the two of you, and the likelihood that other people realize you're gone being twice as high (roughly) but we won't consider that aspect significant. So moving back to the productive aspects of having two people. Assuming we're the female in this case, and the other person is a male, as per the statement rules. That means we have someone who is more likely to be stronger, and more capable of exerting themselves, which could prove useful in a situation like this. However more people is still more better, so we'll say about a 100% productivity bonus just to be safe here. As aforementioned, we have a secondary source of knowledge here, so we can collectively decide on things, as well as think about them, which often leads to more correct/better solutions/outcomes. As well as the obvious benefit of having someone to socialize with, this is a natural morale booster. Humans are social creatures. Nuff said.
One more thing though, since we've established that there are potential benefits to this situation, we must now compare those benefits to the downsides of the other situation, so let's do that
being alone (having no additional help, assuming we aren't immediately mauled and eaten by the bear)
not being alone (the likely potential that you DO get help, and quite significant amounts of it, with the small additional chance of being raped and killed)
Ok i think that pretty much sums it up.
Alright, now moving on to the tertiary aspects of this, let's modify the original statement. And say that we didn't just randomly teleport, and that we walked into the woods with someone else (we aren't counting kidnapping because then this statement wouldn't really apply would it?) Anyway, now that we've pulled foul play off of the table. You're walking into the forest with someone you probably already know, or someone who you've gotten to know thus far. They aren't a stranger or at the very least, not a complete stranger, presumably you don't just wander into the forest randomly for no reason, so lets assume you're going on a hike or something. It's good exercise after all, so for one thing, you've got some level of equipment with you. Probably some level of self defense capability (depending on where you are and how much you care) you did not come into this with the intent of being lost, and you are with someone that you know.
I feel like i don't have to expand on why picking the bear in this option would be a bad choice...
alright, that concludes my lengthy essay on my opinion of this "thought experiment" feel free to yell at me or whatever, or engage with this, i probably missed something. New information always adds to the fun :) The whole point of a thought experiment is trying out new thoughts and weird ideas after all. Also just for the record, since some of you are probably curious. I have no opinion about these sorts of situations what so ever, because they aren't real, and don't exist, so the only valuable thing i can glean from them is through stats and situational analysis.
Think about why someone would prefer the much more likely bear mauling to the much less likely worst case scenario with a man.
the only reason i can think why someone would take that decision, is that they have no apriori knowledge of the situation, and simply assume something they have no knowledge about is going to be easier than that that they do have knowledge about. (which is often naive)
Or, and this is my theory, this is actually one big metaphor about the problems modern society faces, and it's not actually based on rational thought or decision making, and it's supposed to be, because the point is to point out the problem as i already stated. The question that leaves is why nobody seems to be talking about the fundamental underlying problem, and instead seems to be talking about bears.
I get it, there's a problem with this shit in society, why aren't we talking about it? Like if you want to make change happen, to improve society, we need to sit down and have a two sided discussion, instead of saying that you would prefer to be eaten by a bear, than be around a man "because a thing could potentially happen" this accomplishes almost nothing unfortunately.
Anyway, that's my current theory, maybe i'm wrong as fuck, idk, i'm welcome to any ideas, i don't understand why people keep talking about this the way that they are so i could use some background info (and don't tell me that it's because men sometimes rape women, and women don't like being around men as a result, i understand what the thought experiment is for, you don't need to explain that part to me, unless i'm wrong about it and misunderstand it lol.)
i'm just trying to figure out why this is becoming a colloquialism, i mean we've had would you rather for a while. But this is a very different format from it, and it's rather, obtuse. Is the most polite way i can think to explain it.
I hate that i enjoy sociology sometimes, this is one of those times. People suck.
personally i'm not insulted, i get it, i understand the problems, but i also don't understand this at all.
It's like it's hyper polarized almost. The second someone says something or asks a question the response is almost verbatim "yeah but bear wont rape me" (incredibly shitty verbatim quoting but this isn't a fucking PHD paper so dont @ me lol)
Like i get that there's a problem we should be talking about. Why aren't we? We're just reiterating the same statement over and over again, expecting for something to change suddenly.
It's almost an over abundance of caution, similar to "stranger danger" when in reality, the person most likely to abuse your children, is you or someone you know. Not just a random stranger. Which in it of itself can breed an anti-safety culture, where people aren't concerned about people they know "because they would never do this" only to find out that, yes, in fact, they would do that.
It’s so incredibly easy to polarize. We see it in this thread too. The top of this comment thread is a polarization too. Essentially dividing men into 2 distinct set of groups. You’re either good or a villain. This dichotomy is ridiculous and every social community eats it up like crazy, this Lemmy included. These create effects of over abundance, as you mention of caution, fear and hate.
yeah, i just don't understand how people engage in this and don't feel even the littlest bit of fascist tinge to it, because this is how fascist power structures come into play. This is literally how they work. You have an in group, and an out group, anybody in the in group is loyal to you, and anybody in the outgroup is fucking dead.
i can't answer the question unless i'm given more information smh.
If we're talking a magical forest shark, i'm not sure i want to ask questions about why it's there. And why it hasn't died yet, presumably. And if we're in a wet environment, then i'm curious how that's accomplished. The ocean is very big.
i've heard about this, never looked into it because it was about the same effort as just using a dynamic tiling WM anyway. Sounds like it would only be funkier if i did replace it.
even then 90% of what has annoyed me since switching is theming, which is pretty self contained already. So that's easy enough to fix, except for QT theming because it just has to break everything that exists.
But yeah, it's cool having this be a thing in linux for sure.
i've seen at least one person talk about it, and two people discussing it. These kinds of things tend to be very hit or miss, some people get imploded, others see literally nothing happen. And a few will have very weird minor breakages.
i messed with eos, it's alright. I had some problems with the mirrors breaking, to which the solution to fixing the broken keyring trust was "untrust the key, and forcibly install it" which i didn't really like. Other than that it seemed ok.
oh believe me i did, it was fucked. The problem was that the keyring for EOS was out of date, and since i hadn't updated in long enough, there was literally zero chain of trust for that keyring to be updated somehow. So i had to forcibly update it.
I tried a variety of things, including updating eos mirrors iirc, nothing worked until i fixed the keyring lol.
Not cool ( sh.itjust.works ) Englisch
ts moment ( lemmy.ml )
Gotta stab a new drive into computer ( lemmy.world )
Not a Coincidence ( lemm.ee )
Operating Systems for Different Life Stages ( lemmy.zip ) Englisch
Source
Is there anyone here who uses BSD on their desktop? ( lemmy.world )
you don't need more 4GB of RAM ( lemmy.dbzer0.com )
That special milk ( sh.itjust.works )
welp ... ( lemmy.ml )
someone tell them ( lemmy.world )
Why haven't you taken the bear pill? ( jlai.lu )
Tap for contextSome woman on the internet said she would feel safer spending a night in the woods with a random bear rather than with a random man
Gnome developers in a nutshell ( lemmy.world )
I don't know the way, but this ain't it ( lemmy.world )
Top post of PCMR on Reddit today XD ( discuss.tchncs.de )