Rentlar
@Rentlar@lemmy.ca
- Comment on Do Not Put Your Site Behind Cloudflare if You Don't Need To - Rik's Weblog 1 day ago:
Right, but more diversity of providers will reduce the exposed risk profile from both unintentional and intentional disruption.
- Comment on Do Not Put Your Site Behind Cloudflare if You Don't Need To - Rik's Weblog 1 day ago:
No one’s going to bother DDoSing your dinky little server
In the age of AI we now live in there’s more money in data centres than sense, and both venture capital backed businesses and malicious actors (am I repeating myself?) can cast stupidly wide nets.
That said I want to see more alternatives to cloudflare, like a Euro option.
- Comment on An Update on Cities: Skylines II - Development moved to Iceflake Studios 2 days ago:
I don’t need anything from City Skylines 2 other than a fully fledged custom 3d asset importer. Then it will be as if the game has thousands of unpaid staff making content. Though if this next team picks up from an unfamiliar location it might still be a long time before we could even think of getting it.
More updates will be nice.
- Comment on Sony cracks down on Concord custom servers, issues DMCA takedowns on gameplay videos 4 days ago:
Hurry! Release the server code on the high seas before the Sony lawyers find you!!!
- Comment on Is self-hosting becoming too gatekept by power users? 1 week ago:
I think much of the gatekeeping is over concern that if you mess up, you could unknowingly be allowing a sophisticated hacker to access all the data on your network, without any obvious signs. And maybe some people don’t want to field noob questions like “I clicked something and now the GUI gives a 😕 and doesn’t work anymore, what do I do?”.
There is a skill floor, I would say similarly that you wouldn’t be ready to install Linux yourself if you don’t get suspicious when a .iso download gives you a .exe file instead.
I think Yunohost is a decent solution for beginners that avoids as much of the nitty-gritty as possible. Louis has made a massive guide that’s about as close as an IKEA step-by-step as you can get with this stuff. We should be encouraging people to learn but there is a sense of reticence due to cybersecurity reasons.
- Comment on Rush 1 week ago:
Neil planted a drumstick in the ground as a teenager, it sprouted into a drum pedal, and before he knew it, cymbals were in full bloom around him.
May he enjoy eternal bliss with his infinite-piece drum kit.
- Comment on Tax strike? 1 week ago:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=5JA7PH_eUts - This video discusses the idea of tax resistance.
- Comment on A rant on left-wing online infighting 2 weeks ago:
I did a cursory search but couldn’t find too much on weaponized sincerity or Cross’ writings on that. The best I can make out from what you wrote, is that weaponized sincerity is someone’s act of goodwill getting contorted or (charitably) misinterpreted by others as an injustice upon them. You can tell me if I got it wrong.
- Comment on A rant on left-wing online infighting 2 weeks ago:
I appreciate the perspective, I understand and totally support the moderation policy of beehaw and blahaj zone. I do think it is good to have a tough stance and a no-tolerance policy of bigotry, abusers and jerks against the group you are trying to create a safe place to discuss for. Though I don’t know what you mean by defender here.
What I’m trying to get at though, is the assumptions and jumps to conclusions that people make in policy discussions. I recognize this can come from real trauma inflicted on people in past interactions, that prevents real progress towards helpful solutions. Other replies have provided good examples.
We do need to root out problematic behaviour, but we also have to re-discover solidarity if the aim is to form a political bloc or movement that can accomplish things. I posit that creating and maintaing a safe space is an equally valid but not quite the same aim–one needs more focus on reducing infighting than the other.
- Comment on A rant on left-wing online infighting 2 weeks ago:
I’m not familiar with Critical Support in this context and I’m having trouble understanding your comment, but thank you for sharing. I sense that you believe USA is already a one-party state with a token opposition, but I can’t glean much more than that. I’m not asking you to fall in line or change your principles, just be clearer about where you agree or disagree with a policy or person.
If you’d like a 1930s fascism analogy, if Mussolini wants the trains to run on time, you don’t have to call for trains to run late just because Mussolini wants the opposite. And in contexts outside of where this was being used as a campaign slogan or dogwhistle for fascism, the fact you want the trains to be on time doesn’t necessarily mean you support Mussolini or their party, or that you trust them to actually make trains run on time. And it does not mean you want Jews, communists and outsiders to be oppressed nor that you support any of the dictatorial reforms he put in.
- Comment on A rant on left-wing online infighting 2 weeks ago:
I’ve only tangentially followed French politique and the LFI is the party on the left that wants to change the republic system completely, though they are kind of allied with every leftwing up to the socialist part. The Socialists want to govern like normal but are (right now unsuccessfully) trying to get a wealth tax passed.
President Macron tries to do the same thing over and over nominating a centre-right Prime Minister and expecting different results. It’s like a program stuck in a loop. Without a constitutional overhaul or a party winning override power seems like nothing can happen there until 2027. Correct me if I am getting anything wrong here.
- Comment on A rant on left-wing online infighting 2 weeks ago:
On that topic you’re quite right. One PAC was funding contradictory messages about Kamala Harris’ stance on Israel, targated at Jewish and Muslim populations.
There probably are a handful of propagandists here, but I start with the presumption that almost everyone engages with good faith until shown otherwise. Anyway, that’s why I’m calling for nuance in my rant, which could help combat assumptions formed from propaganda.
- Comment on A rant on left-wing online infighting 2 weeks ago:
I kind of feel you here, though I think this reply put it most aptly.
To paraphrase it bluntly: if you believe progressive stuff in most areas but regressive in one, the regressive movement welcomes you with open arms as long as it is convenient, while the loudest progressives will shun you out of their movement.
My rant is a bit of a call for more nuance.
- Comment on A rant on left-wing online infighting 2 weeks ago:
Thanks for the sympathy, your analogy describes it well.
- Comment on A rant on left-wing online infighting 2 weeks ago:
Okay, I can understand your opinion. My question to you is then, how do we reverse or break this cycle? Asking earnestly.
Does the US just have to wait for a golden goose like an American Greta Thunberg who checks every box for you? Since painting every good thing with the brush of bad things doesn’t appear to inspire anyone to improve. And if your answer is there is nothing that can be done about it, then what’s the problem with at least trying to slow it down, by shaming bad things and cheering good ones?
- Comment on A rant on left-wing online infighting 2 weeks ago:
Yeah, we’ll see. Looking from the outside of the US I hope you can get through it.
- Comment on A rant on left-wing online infighting 2 weeks ago:
Thanks, I respect that. I don’t want you to change or abandon your principles just for the sake of being agreeable. You know you can hold different principles in a variety of topics, and my main ask is that in discussion we be clear where these principles align and where they do not.
- Comment on A rant on left-wing online infighting 2 weeks ago:
Exactly. I’m not asking people to change their opinions, I’m asking for a little more nuance and less jumping to conclusions.
- Comment on A rant on left-wing online infighting 2 weeks ago:
Yes you are correct that is how elections work, but I argue that when an article or post topic is about a policy, let’s focus the discussion on the policy, and caveat with what you don’t like about the politician alongside it if you need to. Just because you like someone’s policy idea in one area, isn’t going to make you vote for them, and IMO, people assuming that association is what dissuades meaningful discussion on things we mutually want. After coming to an agreement we can then find a person that better fits the bill to elect. When it’s about voting and elections, let’s discuss more on the politician’s merits and demerits over there.
- Comment on A rant on left-wing online infighting 2 weeks ago:
I get your point about the rise of neo-liberalism and the helpless feeling of having no good choices. But there’s a mindset that stems from “differences in values”, that could lead to someone today self-describing as a communist who would reject class-war opinions from a resurrected Karl Marx, because of his 19th-century patriarchal views, him not talking enough about the oppression of women transgender and non-binary folks, he may view Indigenous culture as a barrier to social progress and collective power, or because modern-day Russia attacks Ukraine or whatever. I’m not saying this is you, but I hope this illustrates what frustrates me with the online progressive movement.
If one has to wait for a perfect vessel before anyone can start agreeing on policies, then we will never find a vessel that everyone finds perfect and never get started organizing around the policies we want.
- Comment on A rant on left-wing online infighting 2 weeks ago:
And I’m okay with your example, that would be to me best described as “even if it was for reasons you would like (defeating Trump) he did actions you think are bad (neo-Nazi-like, and specifically transphobic)”. Like you can say that Newsom shouldn’t belong in the Democrat tent because of this or that, but if he proposes housing policy that you think would be helpful, either link a material reason as to why his transphobia, previous deed or other negative quality would taint this proposal. Otherwise say something “I like this policy …even if I don’t like him” or “…even if he’s a shitbird neo-lib transphobe” or “…even if he’s probably just doing it to run for a future Presidency” or “…though most of the credit should go to the CA Assembly”.
In a more extreme hypothetical, if Trump were to somehow get Grok or ChatGPT to slop out a universal US healthcare policy document that has comprehensive detail, I might applaud the plan itself on its merits, but of course I know Trump is a pathological liar, changes his mind all the time, his administration is full of idiots too evil and incompetent to implement it, and Republican, big pharma and insurance donors will never let that get off the ground and so I’d have little trust in that happening. But I would say “Trump, as much as I despise him, had a good idea for once that Democrats could actually try implementing for real”, or “he’s probably going to say the opposite after a quick chat with Perdue” instead of “I don’t like this plan only because it came from Trump”. Discourse would be better if we could separate the words/actions from the speaker, at least to start, but say why that speaker or a relevant larger context makes the words/actions unreliable if that’s the case.
- Submitted 2 weeks ago to rant@lemmy.sdf.org | 92 comments
- Comment on New World will stop receiving updates following Amazon layoffs 3 weeks ago:
I knew that this game was overhyped and its life would be limited, but now is the time to try to preserve this game as much as possible ahead of shutdown date.
- Comment on Just up the production quality and they'll love it, Trust me bro 👍 3 weeks ago:
Brthday sut
- Comment on Did it really used to be common for guys to go to a bar every night like in Cheers or The Simpsons? 3 weeks ago:
Yes, and in some places especially small towns, it is for some people, since it’s the main hangout spot (3rd place) in town.
Though I don’t think young people do that as much, “regulars” tend to mean 1-3 times a week. My university had a bar that had a “ritual” where Friday afternoons it would be a completely full house.
- Comment on Why would I buy this? 4 weeks ago:
With CoD BO3 extensive ability to be modded and workshop support, it could be theoretically possible.
- Comment on [deleted] 4 weeks ago:
Well, uh, try training your AI with the lessons learned, and hope it doesn’t instantly pretend it never happened the very next day.
The one value proposition for juniors is that though they screw up a lot, they learn by screwing up. High turnover and curtailing your junior experience using AI are major technical mistakes on management’s part.
- Comment on If websites are slow for you, this is why, AWS is breaking everything 4 weeks ago:
It really shows what a great life that we on the Fediverse are living, by making our tech independent to a degree from the largest tech providers.
- Comment on Alibaba Cloud says it cut Nvidia AI GPU use by 82% with new pooling system— up to 9x increase in output lets 213 GPUs perform like 1,192 4 weeks ago:
I do expect operational savings from this optimization, but my guesstimate would be a 2-5x savings rather than the reported 9x savings when looked at over a fixed time period.
- Comment on Alibaba Cloud says it cut Nvidia AI GPU use by 82% with new pooling system— up to 9x increase in output lets 213 GPUs perform like 1,192 4 weeks ago:
It should be noted, how much will that affect the lifespan of those GPUs running double-dutyx8?
AI’s still replaceable but it will emulate human-like burnout.