If steam accidentally deleted someone's home directory in a bash script via a single error, I doubt I would catch that one myself.
moonpiedumplings
joined 2 years ago
It's not just protection against security, but also human error.
https://github.com/MrMEEE/bumblebee-Old-and-abbandoned/issues/123
https://hackaday.com/2024/01/20/how-a-steam-bug-once-deleted-all-of-someones-user-data/
Just because I trust someone to write a program in a modern language they are familier in, doesn't mean I trust them to write an install script in bash, especially given how many footguns bash has.
#1 things holding back Nix adoption is piss poor documentation
The docs are bad because there is this massive split between flakes and nonflakes , where flakes are considered "unstable" and "experimental" but a ton of people use them. The official docs, due to flakes being experimental, can't really touch on that topic at all, and the unofficial docs will mostly be flakes only. And some things can only be done via flakes or only via channels, so that furthers the issue.
There was another discourse post about it, and it was agreed that the nix team just needs to choose something, as the problem is the split and indecisivice, rather than flakss or channels (old way) being uniquely bad.
where Nix “3rd party” tooling shines is in documentation
Determinate systems nix ships with flakes enabled by default. Official nix does not. This means thay determinate nix has a much easier time documenting their product as they exclusively use flakes.
The problem and potential conflict of interest documented in that thread, is that many of the determinate systems employees are big nix contributors with much power over nix official
including Eelco Dostra, the inventor of nix and the creator of flakes. Despite clearly doing recent work with flakes, and clearly contributing to making flakes the "default" in determinate nix, very little effort has been put into making flakes official by these same contributors.
The fear is that nix official is being intentionally kept bad, in order to push the product of determinate systems nix.
The documentation has long since been changed.
Note that the anon user is able to become root without a password by default, as a development convenience. To prevent this, remove anon from the wheel group and it will no longer be able to run /bin/su.
https://github.com/SerenityOS/serenity/commit/a2a6bc534868773b9320ec3ca7399283cf7a375b (this seems to have also switched to gender neutral language in other parts.'of the documentation and comments as well).
Original drama: https://github.com/SerenityOS/serenity/pull/6814
The FSF doesn't seem to have teeth when it comes to things like this, instead it's the SFC who intervenes.
In January, the Software Freedom Conservancy, an open source advocacy group that intervened to help Suhy several years ago, submitted an amicus brief to the Ninth Circuit
Give us your fstab and lsblk.
Or, the specific piece of information I want is where the kernels are located. When /boot is part of the root subvolume (not the default setup, sadly), then the kernels will be snapshpotted along with the rest of the filesystem. /boot/efi would be where the efi system partition is, and where the bootloader is installed.
If /boot is instead the efi parition (default setup lmao), then this means that when you restored a snapshot of your root subvolume, your kernels were not downgraded. I suspect that older kernels attempting to read/view newer kernel modules would cause this boot failure.
If the root account is locked, which cachyos does by default, then you won't get anything from this screen.
I had to fix by usb booting and troubleshooting (a different issue though, I was playing with initramfs generation).
What are you using to view this? Nushell?
https://moonpiedumplings.github.io/blog/docker-registry/
I threw together a list of a few dockerhub alternatives, including the fact that apparently google has a public mirror.
It's because you go to a Linux conference and meet interesting people and you ask for their contact, and they offer either signal or matrix.
XMPP is still being maintained and stuff, and still works fine, it's just not as widely used.
Okay. So I did a little research since I was truly curious.
Boom. A genetic link between aggression and certain violent behaviors and pitbulls. 15% of their personality. Caused by an aggressive period of selectively breeding them for dogfights.
And now I think we should breed pitbulls out of existence.
@[email protected] (is this how you @ a user?).
1 source. That's all it fucking takes. I don't understand why people who spend so much time on the internet are so mid at arguing. 4 articles of AI slop aren't going to convince anyone of shit. 2-3 other articles that don't actually back up your point have the same issue. But you're prancing all over this thread like you're hot shit. The issues I mentioned in my previous comment still apply, but here's a new source for you to use I guess, you're welcome.
And of course, I have to obligatorily state that no parallels to human behavior can be drawn from this. No, black people were not "bred for strength". No, they are not inherently more aggressive. No, we should not just use eugenics to eliminate certain "races" because human races are a social construct (see above diagram). However, dogs work differently, it seems.
*Edit: actually this source seems to be somewhat problematic since it seems to cover a dispraportionate amount of news related to pitbulls but that doesn't make the study immediately wrong.
Okay researching further I found another scientific article going in the opposite direction.
However, our community sample of Pit Bull-type dogs showed they are not more aggressive or more likely to have a behavioral diagnosis than other dogs. This does not support reliance on breed-specific legislation to reduce dog bites to humans [23
(Damn, I said I wouldn't argue but now I seem to be arguing with myself. Don't worry chat. Imma win.)
Opens google scholar
- Racism can also happen against dog breeds
- Professional Vets seems to be against breed specific legislation
- Uh oh. The source the first article I linked doesn't even mention pit bulls as a breed
Oh shit. It doesn't even mention the word pitbull. Investigating further, many of the claims that article makes, like the ones about certain dog breeds needing no/less training to do certain things, are just straight up unsourced and not mentioned in the study. wtf?!
I am enraged that the article just straight up fucking lied to me and I fell for it. This is why I use google scholar and vet the studies myself, rather than using a search engine normally.
But it seems like we are back to "pitbulls are products of their environments" again.
On a miscellaneous note, google scholar seems to have really enshittified. It's now attempting to show me normal news articles and blog posts, rather than exclusively scientific journals. Eugh.
Docker doesn't do this anymore. Their install script got moved to "only do this for testing".
Now, their install page recommends packages/repos first, and then a manual install of the binaries second.