• 0 Posts
  • 54 Comments
Joined 9 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 29th, 2024

help-circle

  • He’s probably overly defensive and paranoid and interprets some forms of criticism as attacks.

    I think this was also a result of his “miscommunication” in the past

    there might also be parties involved who are ACTUALLY interested in attacking GrapheneOS and weakening its popularity, for their own gains.

    when your successful and also high-quality project is under regular attacks from various angles

    Rossman’s over-dramatic nature and high reach

    then communication spirals out of control into various escalations

    You should actually look at any of the copious amounts of evidence that involve this conversation instead of just imagining what it might look like. There’s really not much else to talk about until you do. Daniel has given us zero evidence to support his side, while in contrast there’s a mountain of evidence against him.


  • I know this is a Louis Rossman thread but calling Daniel Micay “a bit socially awkward” is minimizing the issue to an extreme. Louis Rossman made his comments after he watched Techlore’s in-depth video documenting Daniel’s behavior, but keep in mind that even that hour-long video is just scratching the surface. To this day, Daniel continues to act the same way if not worse, and has a giant list of “enemies” that he says are attacking, harassing, bullying, and gangstalking the “grapheneOS project” (aka him). This might be partially caused by him bashing other open source projects and making new enemies any chance he gets. I’m not sure when the “all open source projects get together to personally target Daniel Micay” meetings occur, but maybe the only common thread is Daniel himself. There are tons and tons of receipts out there on the web if you search for “Daniel Micay list of enemies”, especially on a site that I don’t feel comfortable promoting but which does a very good job of keeping track of this stuff - especially because Daniel always deletes everything incriminating afterwards. If you’re going to catch him in the act you need to take screenshots and make archive.org snapshots.

    Daniel’s behavior is a very important issue to be aware of if you’re considering using grapheneOS, and personally it crosses the line of what I feel comfortable with in regards to running his operating system on the most personal device I have. Louis Rossman was even more justified in his decision to do the same, since Daniel is (to this day) specifically targeting him.



  • Solid video, and it comes from a pretty grounded viewpoint. It’s not very techy or pros/cons-focused; it’s more about the “spirituality” of what we’re even doing with the technology in our lives. They’re obviously not a tech expert, but their mindset and “breaking point” are a lot more relatable for most casual people. This is the sort of realization that people are going to continue having as big tech encroaches further and further on their lives. E.g. their example of “it’s not one big problem, it’s many small problems that add up” with why it’s so frustrating to use Windows, but then why people continue to use it.

    It will take a “breaking point” and self-motivated change to critically evaluate the power that you’re giving to corporations and decide that you’re going to accept some discomfort in order to fix it. There will never be a perfect time to effortlessly switch your entire workflow across operating systems. I daresay that if there ever was a point at which switching to Linux was effortless, big tech would flash something new and shiny and make that no longer the case. They prey on keeping people in the path of least resistance, and understanding their strategy is the first step to doing something about it.

    Wish people would have realized this a couple decades ago, but it really does feel like Linux is re-entering public discourse as people are getting more and more jaded about their relationship with big tech companies.






  • I don’t think ‘cattle not pets’ is all that corporate, especially w/r/t death of the author. For me, it’s more about making sure that failure modes have (rehearsed) plans of action, and being cognizant of any manual/unreplicable “hand-feeding” that you’re doing. Random and unexpected hardware death should be part of your system’s lifecycle, and not something to spend time worrying about. This is also basically how ZFS was designed from a core level, with its immense distrust for hardware allowing you to connect whatever junky parts you want and letting ZFS catch drives that are lying/dying. In the original example, uptime seems to be an emphasized tenet, but I don’t think it’s the most important part.

    RE replacements on scheduled time, that might be true for RAIDZ1, but IMO a big selling point of RAIDZ2 is that you’re not in a huge rush to get resilvering done. I keep a cold drive around anyway.


  • “Cattle not pets” in this instance means you have a specific plan for the random death of a HDD (which RAIDZ2 basically already handles), and because of that you can work your HDDs until they are completely dead. If your NAS is a “pet” then your strategy is more along the lines of taking extra-good care of your system (e.g. rotating HDDs out when you think they’re getting too old, not putting too much stress on them) and praying that nothing unexpected happens. I’d argue it’s not really “okay” to have pets just because you’re in a homelab, as you don’t really have to put too much effort into changing your setup to be more cynical instead of optimistic, and it can even save you money since you don’t need to worry about keeping things fresh and new.

    “In the old way of doing things, we treat our servers like pets, for example Bob the mail server. If Bob goes down, it’s all hands on deck. The CEO can’t get his email and it’s the end of the world. In the new way, servers are numbered, like cattle in a herd. For example, www001 to www100. When one server goes down, it’s taken out back, shot, and replaced on the line.”

    ~from https://cloudscaling.com/blog/cloud-computing/the-history-of-pets-vs-cattle/



  • TechnicallyColors@lemm.eetoMildly Infuriating@lemmy.world*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    I think it’s hard to dig yourself out of this hole unless you’ve got early retirement on the horizon. The more you work, the less of an outside life you have, and the less you feel compelled to focus on anything but work, rinse and repeat. Your friend probably doesn’t have anything to look forward to IRL, so might as well make more money.


  • Maybe tangential but this reminded me of how much I hate setting up systemd timers/services. I refuse to accept that creating two files in two different directories and searching online for the default timer and service templates is an okay workflow over simply throwing a cron expression next to the command you want to run and being done with it. Is there really no way we can have a crontab-equivalent that virtually converts into a systemd backend when you don’t need the extra power? I feel like an old person that can’t accept change but it’s been a decade and I’m still angry.



  • As I understand it, the assertion is that the 1080p FPS is the same as 2k/4k FPS, assuming that you have an infinitely powerful GPU. So the 1080p FPS is your max potential FPS at any resolution with the CPU, and then you need to look at a GPU 2k/4k chart to see how much FPS it can achieve from that target. HWUnboxed also reasons that gamers are not blindly using ultra settings, so in real scenarios people are going to be lowering their settings to try to achieve a specific FPS target anyway. They also mention that lowering ingame settings doesn’t usually affect the CPU FPS benchmark.

    So in summary, the 1080p CPU benchmark is the ~highest possible target you can achieve, and then it’s up to your GPU and ingame settings to decide how much of that target you can reach. It’s a little more difficult to grasp and calculate mentally, but it prevents the 2k/4k benchmark data from showing what is effectively misleading “point in time” data that will not be useful if you have a different GPU or ingame settings. This is most clearly demonstrated by re-reviewing older CPUs in the future-proof section and showing that putting massive GPUs on old CPUs puts the FPS benchmarks of all resolutions to roughly the same value - i.e. the CPU doesn’t truly have an effect w/r/t resolution, it’s mainly just the GPU.



  • I think ProStreet is very underrated, and I’d say that’s my favorite. The car handling is a nice balance between realistic and arcadey, and the game is just a really entertaining take on track racing. Most of the game feels tight with its controls and challenges, and there are clear ways to express skill and achieve goals. My biggest problem with it is that dominating events (setting track records) is a little too easy, which probably works well for kids, but as someone who knows how to play racing games it’s often a matter of not crashing and having a reasonable car. There’s probably a mod to change that though? The soundtrack is also a bit mid compared to other NFS titles from this time but it does grow on you a bit.

    Most Wanted is probably my second place, but I think it’s not untouchable. The rubberbanding almost singlehandedly kills any sort of difficulty. In MW you’re there to race neat cars and look cool doing it. There’s no real challenge, and if there is, it’s not a fair one. It could be a little less menu-driven too. Sometimes it feels very linear in how you progress through the game, just picking event after event from the menu, and even starting police chases from it.

    Carbon is probably third place? It’s more interesting than MW in a lot of ways but it’s also just more mediocre in most respects. I consider MW and Carbon to be two sides of the same coin, but if it comes down to it I think you can easily put Carbon below MW. I think most people consider Carbon to be complete trash, but I don’t think it’s fair to say there’s nothing good about it.

    Underground 1 just sucks, and Underground 2 doesn’t have a lot to offer in retrospect. Both Undergrounds were amazing at the time, but now that we have newer alternatives I don’t think there’s a lot of reason to return to U2, and I think U1 has aged like milk in just about every respect. I could definitely be convinced to play U2 again, but it’s not something I feel a strong pull to return to.

    Other Need for Speeds have a lot of hits and a lot of misses, and it’s hard to want to put them in any sort of ranking system. They can all be fun in certain ways, but like most people I consider Black Box NFS to be the real NFS.