You’re not even reading what I wrote.
I said that you can only call something nonviolent by drawing an arbitrary line separating it from the violence that preceded it, followed it or the violence done by someone else or threatened by other events.
Sucks to suck I guess. Bye.
You asked for it:
Next is Ecuador in ‘05 when they sent guiterrez to Brazil.
But here’s the third sentence in the intro paragraph of the Wikipedia article about that event:
What started as nonviolent anti-government protests in March mushroomed into violent rioting and spread countywide. Protesters demanded the fall of the government and an end to corruption.
Maybe the next one will prove your point…
South Korea! The June Struggle? Here’s the Wikipedia article on its background:
Chun and Roh were unwilling to use violence as the 1988 Olympic Games in Seoul were approaching. They believed that doing so would draw further criticism, with the regime already under international pressure after the Gwangju Uprising and its massacre a few years earlier.
Almost like the nonviolent resolution was made possible by violence before it…
How about the next one:
Oh, the white lily student movement! Surely there’s a good solid Wikipedia article about that!
Barely past a stub? No mention of the boat people massacre three years before, changs successors recognizing the need to get international support after decades of martial law and the clear message from foreign influence in the Tiananmen protests the year before?
Must have been the wind.
Dateline - Philippines edsa 2, nonviolent government handover as long as you don’t count the precipitated edsa 3 just a few months later.
Oh, now we’re talking about Sudan, never mind that after the protest wave (not entirely nonviolent but I’ll leave that by the wayside for now) the military took over the transitional government.
Now I know I took a pretty let’s call it conversational tone in the above and that breakdown is for two reasons, one, I don’t want to legitimize that dogshit Wikipedia article by talking about it in neutral language and two, I’m tired.
The point isn’t to argue over specifics about some shitty wiki article but to recognize that things are only called “nonviolent” when arbitrary lines around them in time, place and even people that exclude the violent component of their existence are drawn.
That section of the Wikipedia page is pretty weird looking right off the bat. The first two are the cedar in Lebanon and the Mirabal sisters which are circumstances that are hard to call nonviolent.
The cedar revolution can only be called nonviolent if you disregard the 01 protest wave that preceded it and established with violence that everyone was actually on the side of ending syrian occupation and not having car bomb attacks all the god damned time.
And el jefe was fucking assassinated by the military at international urging. That’s not nonviolent!
I didn’t look any further but it really seems like a bad list that’s written with incredibly rose-colored glasses.
So you’re on fedora, is there a specific keygen or cracked version of chessbase you wanna run?
I can make a vm and check it out later on when I get home.
| is usually my solution.
Quoting variables in scripts is my other go to before I actually start tracing what went wrong.
here’s a fifteen year old stack overflow thread where someone asks where a unique system identifier can be read and someone suggests machine-id.
Lest that be considered old and bad information, I just checked /etc/machine-id on a new install of Debian 13 and the permissions were 444, readable by owner, group and everyone else.
So programs can read machine-id. If programs can read it they can transmit it. I hope someone capable of writing a program that can id my machine doesn’t need a proof of that.
Further, programs reading machine-id don’t necessarily fall into the spyware category by default like you say. There are plenty of perfectly good reasons to request a machine specific identifier.
Getting rid of the literal “papers please!” “Okay officer!” File literally makes investigation more difficult and puts a barrier up to tracking where there was none before. Presenting a unique hashed output based on the systems machine-id prevents a tracking method that is currently as easy as read file -> get identifier.
The fact that other methods of tracking exist doesn’t make preventing this method not worthwhile and you should be ashamed for suggesting that.
I am a Unix jihad, gpl em all and let god sort em out, rust programmers are compradors type motherfucker but a company not wanting to use your software because of the license is a barrier to use.
Machine-id is read as plaintext by programs and transmitted as plaintext by programs.
Hashing the unique id from the host side as opposed to trusting programs to read it and act in a way the user understands and deems appropriate is a much better method of handling calls to identify the equipment than just letting programs read your standardized unique id.
And the above would literally solve something, it would keep programs from just walking directly across the mat tee posing to get a unique id and force them to do some kind of jetpack backflip routine that, when presented to a court, is much more tenuous.
Np. It’s easy to just choose the license that is easiest or “fire and forget”, but too many programmers don’t consider what kind of freedoms they want their speech to have and that the license is how you define that.
If you want to know something feel free to ask.
@SpiderUnderUrBed@lemmy.zip , if you post the model of your laptop someone can help you figure out if you can damage your battery or computer with a weird charger. Without this critical information all anyone can say is “maybe?”
There is not a parameter to automatically change it every time the system boots, that solution doesn’t work for machines that don’t reboot often and it breaks stuff in systemd as volunteered by many people talking about it online and as verified by me two weeks ago when I tried that.
Yes as I said it’s working as intended. The point of machine id is to id a machine.
A better solution would be to not rely on the various programs to hash the unique id and instead have the host read it, hash it and provide the hash to the program that asked.
The point of different licenses is the thing you ought to be looking at.
The point of mit is to get the licensed thing used as widely as possible. It breaks down any barriers to use. A good example of something that should be mit licensed is an encryption algorithm. A good example of something that shouldn’t be mit licensed is anything else.
The point of bsd3-clause is to prevent the licensed likeness from being used to imply the creator shares some view or idea. A good example of something that should be bsd3-clause licensed is the royalty free music on youtube. A good example of something that shouldn’t be bsd3-clause licensed is a creative work the author wants to have their name known for.
The point of the various gpl licenses is to create a digital commons that all people can access. A good example of something that ought to be gpl licensed is a game engine you want people to be able to freely use and modify but never make secret changes to sell. A good example of something that shouldn’t be gpl is a game engine you want to eventually sell the code of or make secret changes and sell the code of those.
If my language sounds biased, it is because I have a bias.
Another user said they think machine-id is readable by the browser. This is absolutely true, machine-id is working as described when it is read by any web browser.
So Linux isn’t sending your unique id to a central entity that can associate it with your ip, it’s sending your unique id to any entity you browse to that can then associate it with your ip.
It’s definitely the early pc era x1000.
For better or worse.
Another person already wrote this itt, but the cost in time and money of building something that “works” is very low. That cost increases every time you need to fix something. It’s why I’ve switched to deepseek flash instead of the bigger, better coding models. For the same price as a million tokens of Claude for example I can get a hundred million tokens on flash. It takes three times as long and needs a little prodding but it’s thirty times cheaper.
Even if you’re not dealing with ballooning costs when it comes to upkeep, the present environment around ai programming is filled with perverse incentives that reduce the chance something is open sourced. Why preserve the old work and try to carry it into the future when you can just rewrite it? Why create standardized libraries and approaches to specific problems when it’s only gonna be used once? Why make it open when you don’t have time to deal with requests and bug reports you don’t care about? Why use gpl when you don’t intend to make it public anyway?
Those were all arguments against gpl and open sourcing parts of the Unix codebase too, btw.
Harnesses or agents try to address some of this by sharing improvements but that’s three layers removed from directly turning fossil fuels into cpu cycles to make the same program a thousand times slightly different for a thousand different people.
I tend to see the ai programming defense in the same way you described yourself and the “ai is bullshit” crowd. People defending this stuff generally either aren’t looking where they’re walking or haven’t had to use it long.
As a decently prolific user of ai programming, it’s turned computer code into disposable plastic wrappers. Even if they don’t persist and make a giant garbage raft in the ocean or calcify our pineal glands we still wasted a bunch of energy on them.
Use a surface cleaner first. You wanna get the majority of the crud broken up and off first, wiping towards the middle then go get the whole thing with a glass cleaner using a microfiber cloth if you don’t have a squeegee.
Probably unplug three of those fans and block off the case openings to get some sort of laminar flow.
Switch to a more efficient power supply. Yours is platinum but it may be worth it to look into a list of low standby power units.
Maybe take out half your ram. It probably doesn’t matter though, I’m thinking about the need for lpddr to get past the 1tb barrier on old servers.
The b850 boards will have efficiency settings in the bios that will make the biggest difference.
Before you change anything though I would recommend first putting a watt meter inline and measuring.
Theres a bunch of stuff you can manually do in software but its fractions of a percent and makes your experience very nonstandard.
The biggest thing is probably gonna be turning off the computer when you’re not using it. It’s not like you’re gonna be spinning down a bunch of hdds…
The number one culprit of undesirable cornering behavior is incorrect tire pressure.
You will not like this answer:
An old 11” macbook air or the 12” macbook circa ‘17.
They’re everywhere, last forever, parts are cheap, they’re durable, there is good Linux support, the screens are good and they don’t stick out when you’re using them in public.
I used to have 11” as my hard upper limit of diagonal size years ago but since then I realized it’s no big deal to carry a 13” diagonal computer now that they’re all incredibly thin and light.