Israel committing genocide in Gaza, say Israel-based human rights groups
It Shouldn't Have Taken This Much For Mainstream Voices To Start Speaking Up About Gaza
Israel’s top human rights group B’Tselem has finally declared that Israel is committing genocide, as has the Israel-based Physicians for Human Rights. The Israeli organizations join Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, UN human rights experts, and the overwhelming majority of leading authorities on the subject of genocide in their conclusion.
The debate is over. The Israel apologists lost. And we are seeing this reflected in mainstream discourse. Pop megastar Ariana Grande has started speaking out in support of Gaza, telling her social media followers that “starving people to death is a red line.” This is a new threshold. Opposing Israel’s genocide is now the most mainstream as it has ever been.
We’re now seeing notoriously Zionist swamp monsters in the Democratic Party like Barack Obama, Hakeem Jeffries, Cory Booker and Amy Klobuchar changing their tune and attacking Netanyahu and Trump for their joint genocide project in Gaza, with increasingly forceful pushback from some on the right like Marjorie Taylor Greene as well.
As western pundits, politicians and celebrities suddenly pivot to denouncing Israel’s genocidal atrocities after two years of silence, it’s hard to believe that just a few weeks ago we were being told that saying “death to the IDF” is a hate crime.
People who’ve been staring at this genocide from the beginning have been asking the entire time, what is it going to take? What will it take for our society to stop sleepwalking through inane trivialities and vapid distractions and start opposing the holocaust of our day?
- Raining military explosives on a giant concentration camp packed full of children wasn’t enough.
- Burning children alive wasn’t enough.
- Systematically destroying Gaza’s entire healthcare infrastructure — up to and including entering hospitals they’ve attacked and destroying individual pieces of medical equipment one by one — wasn’t enough.
- Killing more journalists than were killed in both World Wars plus the US Civil War, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Yugoslav Wars, the War in Afghanistan, and the ongoing war in Ukraine wasn’t enough.
- The systemic rape and torture of prisoners wasn’t enough.
I’m glad people are waking up to the cruel reality of this nightmare. I’m grateful to each and every influential voice who uses their platform to speak out, even at this late date. I truly am.
But I also think we need to take a very hard, very uncomfortable look at ourselves as a society right now. If all those monstrous abuses were tolerable for us over these last two years, there’s something deeply and profoundly sick about our civilization.
The way things are clearly isn’t working. The mainstream worldview is clearly a lie. Everything we’ve been taught to believe about our society, our nation, our government and our world was clearly false.
We need to fight our way through the cognitive dissonance of recognizing that our entire way of looking at things as a collective has failed, and we need to find a new way of being.
Otherwise we’re going to keep being smashed in the face with increasingly horrifying reminders of what we have allowed ourselves to become.
The lessons will repeat until they are learned.
It Shouldn't Have Taken This Much For Mainstream Voices To Start Speaking Up About Gaza
Listen to a reading of this article (reading by Tim Foley):Caitlin Johnstone (Caitlin’s Newsletter)
Trump reiterates that he has the authority to pardon Ghislaine Maxwell
President Donald Trump on Monday reiterated that he is “allowed” to pardon Jeffrey Epstein’s co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell but told reporters that no one has asked him to issue one to her.
When asked on Monday if he would ever consider a pardon for Maxwell, who is currently serving a 20-year federal prison sentence for child sex trafficking and other crimes, Trump told reporters: “Well, I’m allowed to give her a pardon, but I — nobody’s approached me with it. Nobody’s asked me about it. It’s in the news about that, that aspect of it, but right now, it would be inappropriate to talk about it.”
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/07/28/trump-ghislaine-maxwell-pardon-jeffrey-epstein-00479862
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
Trump reiterates that he has the authority to pardon Ghislaine Maxwell
President Donald Trump on Monday reiterated that he is “allowed” to pardon Jeffrey Epstein’s co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell but told reporters that no one has asked him to issue one to her.
When asked on Monday if he would ever consider a pardon for Maxwell, who is currently serving a 20-year federal prison sentence for child sex trafficking and other crimes, Trump told reporters: “Well, I’m allowed to give her a pardon, but I — nobody’s approached me with it. Nobody’s asked me about it. It’s in the news about that, that aspect of it, but right now, it would be inappropriate to talk about it.”
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/07/28/trump-ghislaine-maxwell-pardon-jeffrey-epstein-00479862
Donald Trump Jr.’s Drone Ventures Could Make a Killing — Thanks to Dad’s Big Beautiful Budget
Last November, shortly after Donald Trump was reelected president, his son Donald Trump Jr. joined a venture capital firm with investments in several defense companies. Later that month, he was appointed the advisory board of Unusual Machines, a small, Florida-based drone company incorporated in Nevada.
Securities filings showed Trump Jr. owned 331,580 shares in the company, with only two top executives holding more.
Unusual Machines has been positioning itself to benefit from legislative and government policy changes.
The company is made up of two parts: Fat Shark, which makes goggles, controllers, and other drone components and accessories; and an e-commerce platform called Rotor Riot, which sells drone parts. According to a pitch deck for investors, Unusual Machines also plans to acquire an Australian drone motor manufacturer, Rotor Lab.
Donald Trump Jr.’s Drone Ventures Could Make a Killing — Thanks to Dad’s Big Beautiful Budget
After Trump was reelected, his son Donald Trump Jr. took stakes in several drone companies. They’re now raising ethics concerns.Ellen Ioanes (The Intercept)
cbsnews.com/news/podesta-email…
Another flag came from a speech to the National Multi-Housing Council on April 24, 2013: “Clinton Says You Need to Have a Private and Public Position on Policy.”“I mean, politics is like sausage being made,” she said in the speech according to the excerpt. “It is unsavory, and it always has been that way, but we usually end up where we need to be. But if everybody’s watching, you know, all of the back room discussions and the deals, you know, then people get a little nervous, to say the least. So, you need both a public and a private position.”
Podesta emails show excerpts of Clinton speeches to Goldman
New trove of hacked emails reveal Clinton campaign was concerned about specific speeches to Wall Street bankJulianna Goldman (CBS News)
Oh dear
Making America great again?
Just highlights the point that these people get paid in a month what one of the overentitled twats will pay for a pair of jeans or a TACO golf shirt.
US tariffs: Lesotho factory that made Trump shirts hard hit by US tariffs
The uncertainty around the paused tariffs has led to massive layoffs in Lesotho's textile industry.Khanyisile Ngcobo & Shingai Nyoka (BBC News)
Europe bends over for Trump. Promises to buy American weapons and accept 15% tarriff.
The deal includes $600bn (£446bn) of EU investments in the US, and the bloc will buy $750bn (£558bn) of US energy and also purchase American military equipment.
Mr Trump said: "I think it's great that we made a deal today instead of playing games and maybe not making a deal at all."
He said: "We are agreeing that the tariff... for automobiles and everything else will be a straight across tariff of 15%." However, the 15% baseline rate would not apply to steel and aluminium, for which a 50% tariff would stay in place.
US and EU agree trade deal - with bloc facing 15% tariffs on goods into America
Speaking after talks at his Turnberry golf resort, President Donald Trump said it was the "biggest deal ever made" but some EU leaders are unhappy with the terms.Sky News
geneva_convenience likes this.
geneva_convenience likes this.
If a company isn't going to make a profit selling to America, they aren't going to sell it.
So the item the previously listed for $100 and made a $10 profit on, will now cost $115 for that same $10 profit. They won't all of a sudden drop the price by $15 to keep the sale price at $100 and then take a $5 loss on each sale, they will simply stop selling the item or Americans will need to pay $115 for the item and the government gets $15 and the company still gets $10, but it's still the Americans paying that $15 to the government, unless there is already a locally made item which sells for $105 then Americans will buy that instead and the European company can't compete anymore and will stop selling their product and Americans have less choice in the stores.
Thats why i said less profits and not no profits. If they could have sold it for $115 they would have. There might be some price gouging using the tariffs as an excuse but its not gonna be such an effect across the board i dont think.
What I was thinking of was an item with a >15% profit margin now being less but not necessarily unprofitable.
If there is no profit to be made then yeah all the previous profits will go into the hostile countrys private sector since the gap is gonna be closed by domestic companies which is what trump means when he says that tariffs will bring jobs back.
Even in Stalin's time, there was collective leadership. The western idea of a dictator within the communist system is exaggerated. Misunderstandings on that subject are caused by the lack of comprehension of the real nature and organization of the Communist power structure. Stalin, although holding wide powers, was merely the captain of a team, and it seems obvious that Krushchev will be the new captain.
- CIA information report: "Comments on the change in Soviet leadership"
I know this will be downvoted to hell, but this whole let's rally against landlords is kind of stupid in my opinion.
You can say the exact same thing about a bank that gives you a lone, they do zero work and get money.
Or a company that leases or rents out cars.
For a landlord you can make the argument that a home is a primary life necessity. But when you borrow money from a bank it's pretty much the same thing.
Some people don't want to stay in a place too long and like the option to rent. Also it's not like a landlord hard zero risks, you can get tenants that are horrible and trash a place.
Just to be clear I'm not a landlord myself, but also not someone that just hates them because it's a thing now.
like the option
Nobody likes renting. Nobody likes moving. If there wasn't the premium cost from renting, there would be less pressure on these people to change their life arrangements.
That's not really true, one of my friends rented an apartment for about 2 years specifically because he didn't knew if he wanted to live abroad or in a different city. Same goes for my sister she really didn't want any long term commitments to have the freedom to go anywhere. She didn't even wanted a 1 year phone contract.
Lots of young people rent because it gives them more freedom and less burden when they want to move.
Also about the premium cost, it really depends on the laws, like in the Netherlands after you have rented a house for over 1 year, the landlord can only raise the rent a certain percentage. Some people have been renting the same apartment for 30+ years and pay a ridiculous low rent.
You can sell, but you'll get way less for a house that has a tenant, because the new owner can't kick them out. I know someone that bought a house for a really great price, because it had a tenant that had lived there for 50 years or so. It was basically a 10 year waiting game until the tenant died (he was old when this person bought his place). But after that he sold the place for almost double what he paid. I do have to add that in those 10 years the housing market also went up a lot.
I want to add it might seem I like landlords, I don't, but if we want to get mad at someone it should be the system we accepted as a people.
Also it's not like a landlord hard zero risks
Then they should sell instead of renting.
Landlord said to me "property tax has gone up. This is my only form of income. Will need to increase rent"
Told him "yeah, everything has gone up and my paycheck is still the same".
Like, these types of relationships are so parasitic. This is the "nice" mom and pop style landlord too that every liberal seems to want to give a pass too.
Sure, are they less bad than the big corporate faceless landlords? Yes. But the entire relationship is the problem.
They get to justify forcing me out of my home because the value of the house that they own WENT UP.
That's why their property tax is more. They literally own something that is more valuable and making it further impossible for me to ever buy a place of my own.
If that's their whole retirement investment (as they said it's their only income, no idea about us retirement details) if they don't increase your rent, their net income will GO DOWN. Prices of everything also went up for them, if you think it's hard with constant income, imagine with declining income.
The value of their house going up is useless to pay for bread.
You should get a bigger paycheck, average wage growth is around 5% in the US, higher than inflation even.
I swear my uncle is a good landlord. Keeps prices low, I swear he doesn't rip off his renters. He would never do that.
If there were as many good landlords as I have heard this story we wouldn't have any problems Kyle, sit the fuck back down.
Assuming this comment isn't ironic: there is no such thing as a good landlord. Landlords are parasitic middlemen who live by leeching off the value created by workers. They contribute no value whatsoever.
This is admitted even in mainstream economics, its termed rent-seeking.
Well obviously the most moral thing would be to live in it themselves or give it away to someone who actually wants to live in it. I accept that practically nobody is gonna be virtuous enough to just give away a free apartment to a homeless person, but selling it for a (at least somewhat) reasonable price is probably what I'd realistically do (assuming no close friend or family member wanted it).
Renting it out is still inherently exploiting the person living there.
Also consider that no "good person" simply owns a residential property that they don't live in.
I know I'm not who you're replying to and other people might disagree with parts of this, but can anyone seriously not agree that all landlords are scum?
Renting it out is still inherently exploiting the person living there.
There are legit reasons to rent and not own everything. Just like tools, might be better to rent a table saw than buy one that now you have to store and maintain.
No ones acquires an entire apartment building in the first place with the purpose of living in it. They do it to become rent-seeking parasites.
But to your hypothetical, they could create a co-op as @queermunist@lemmy.ml mentioned.
there is no such thing as a good landlord.
Okay, I'll bite. I just bought a 4-bed/3-bath (actually 4 bathrooms, but bathroom math made it "3-bath") because we are a family of four in an expensive tourist spot and wanted a guest bedroom for family and visitors. It just so happened one bed and a 3/4 bathroom is in an attached 1-bedroom apartment with its own kitchen and living room.
So when I retire, and my oldest is out of the house to college, we are thinking we could rent that particular part (at a very reasonable rate to people we know). It is part of the house, so I can't sell it separately. So the choice is be a landlord, or don't offer housing (I suppose I could make it an AirBnB and make even more money, but this area is already fucked for housing for that reason).
So if there is no such thing as a good landlord, what would you recommend in a situation like this? Let someone live there for free? Then they'd be costing me money. Don't rent it out? AirBnB?
So when I retire, and my oldest is out of the house to college, we are thinking we could rent that particular part (at a very reasonable rate to people we know). It is part of the house, so I can't sell it separately.
If you don't need that space, then you might as well sell it and let another family make use of it instead.
Yours is not a unique situation; a lot of older people downsize when their kids move out, and they have a lot of extra rooms and space they no longer need. Its the right decision anyway, as you're now free to be more mobile, and get rid of all the years of accumulated junk.
So you're saying that person should sell their house because one of the rooms is unoccupied? What if their oldest loses their job and can't find a new one, but has to move back, and then can't because they downsized to a smaller house?
I'm not so sure that is a great solution.
What if their oldest loses their job and can’t find a new one, but has to move back, and then can’t because they downsized to a smaller house?
What if their oldest loses their job and now for no fault of their own the renter is suddenly forced to find a new place to live to accommodate the landlords son? But they've been spending their money on rent so they don't have enough savings to find a decent place?
I will admit that's a good point, although hopefully there would be laws preventing an eviction without notice, but you're right it would be a bad situation, it would definitely be disruptive.
However, there are people who prefer to rent because they prefer the freedom from place to place, I think that's worth acknowledging too.
Although I think you're right.
I don't think I could rip off anyone if I decided to rent my place when I move. Hoping to keep it for my kid, but I'd basically charge the bare minimum, would even show the tenant what I pay as the owner so they'd understand. I wouldn't use it as a profit source, but because land is scarce and I just happen to have spent years owning this.
But even then it may not be worth, sell it to a new owner and move on. I'm not greedy by any means, just want to be comfortable.
It would still be someone else paying you to keep your properties value up while receiving nothing of value for their money.
Is not living on the street not really something of value? I feel that is something of value, isn't it?
I dunno, I don't have any interest in becoming a landlord but I commonly see people considering them as the most evil people in the world no matter what and it does confuse me a little bit. People always say landlords are always evil, but there are tenants who are weeks or months late on their rent, they destroy the place, etc, it doesn't seem like such a dream job to me.
Is not living on the street not really something of value? I feel that is something of value, isn’t it?
Just compare it to buying property where you continously pay off your credit. You get something in return, ownership of a property. Just because you are too poor to afford that, thus being forced ot pay rent, you receive significantly less for the money you spend on housing. Also, and this might be a weird stance for americans, I don't think anyone should be facing the choice of being able to pay rent and ending homeless on the street.
I dunno, I don’t have any interest in becoming a landlord but I commonly see people considering them as the most evil people in the world no matter what and it does confuse me a little bit.
They commonly siphon off income from workers to keep their properties value up. This is just pararsitic behaviour.
People always say landlords are always evil, but there are tenants who are weeks or months late on their rent, they destroy the place, etc, it doesn’t seem like such a dream job to me.
So bad tenants are an excuse to be an evil parasite towards every tenant there is? Also, being a landlord isn't just a job. It is making more money from existing property by exploiting the need of housing of those that are not able to afford a place themselves.
Just compare it to buying property where you continously pay off your credit. You get something in return, ownership of a property. Just because you are too poor to afford that, thus being forced ot pay rent, you receive significantly less for the money you spend on housing. Also, and this might be a weird stance for americans, I don’t think anyone should be facing the choice of being able to pay rent and ending homeless on the street.
So you're saying that poor people should just... not live anywhere and instead should live on the street? I'm not sure I get your point, because if that is your point, it's not a very good one.
They commonly siphon off income from workers to keep their properties value up. This is just pararsitic behaviour.
Sure they're all evil parasites, whatever you say, I don't think a large corporation renting out multiple buildings jumping at the chance to raise rent and/or evict someone who is even slightly late on rent is the same as an older man renting out a spare room in his house ever since his oldest moved out?
So bad tenants are an excuse to be an evil parasite towards every tenant there is? Also, being a landlord isn’t just a job. It is making more money from existing property by exploiting the need of housing of those that are not able to afford a place themselves.
So bad tenants being excused from any culpability means that all landlords are automatically evil no matter what?
It is making more money from existing property by exploiting the need of housing of those that are not able to afford a place themselves.
It is providing a place to stay for people who can't otherwise afford one...? Or should those people just live on the street?
So bad tenants being excused from any culpability means that all landlords are automatically evil no matter what?
Noones talking about excusing bad tenants. Stop building strawmen.
So you’re saying that poor people should just… not live anywhere and instead should live on the street? I’m not sure I get your point, because if that is your point, it’s not a very good one.Or should those people just live on the street?
If you'd bothered to read my comment you'd have seen this:
Also, and this might be a weird stance for americans, I don’t think anyone should be facing the choice of being able to pay rent and ending homeless on the street.
Landlords, yes even the nice old man renting out his spare room, are making money simply because they already own property. Of course there is a spectrum between those and large corporations. But the underlying mechanism is still the same.
Noones talking about excusing bad tenants. Stop building strawmen.
Well if there can be good tenants and bad tenants, surely there can be good landlords and bad landlords, or is that not possible, all of them are automatically evil?
Landlords, yes even the nice old man renting out his spare room, are making money simply because they already own property. Of course there is a spectrum between those and large corporations. But the underlying mechanism is still the same.
So by that logic, VPNs and Bitcoin should both be illegal because they can be used by criminals (even though they have legitimate uses too, like bypassing censorship in authoritarian states) because the underlying mechanism is the same
You are not great at logic and analogies, are you?
Well if there can be good tenants and bad tenants, surely there can be good landlords and bad landlords, or is that not possible, all of them are automatically evil?
All of them do earn money just by owning property. I'm not calling that evil or good or bad. It is what it is. And I'm sure many landlords are nice enough people. I am against it though.
So by that logic, VPNs and Bitcoin should both be illegal because they can be used by criminals (even though they have legitimate uses too) because the underlying mechanism is the same
I'm not even sure where to begin. Neither of those, VPN nor Bitcoin, allow you to earn money simply by owning property. Both of them can be used legally and illegally, but that has nothing to do with landlords which are always able to rent out their property completly legally but are still always being a parasite. I'm not saying renting should be banned because one kind of landlords are evil and the others aren't. I'm saying the mechanism of profiting off of property while exploiting the need for housing puts all of them on a spectrum between siphoning off a little or siphoning off a lot of the workers income.
You are not great at logic and analogies, are you?
How does being rude with me, or getting angry at me, solve or change anything? I don't think it actually helps anything, I don't think it's some great sign of intelligence either.
All of them do earn money just by owning property. I’m not calling that evil or good or bad. It is what it is. And I’m sure many landlords are nice enough people. I am against it though.
I'm trying to understand your viewpoint. If not all landlords are bad or evil, why would you be against it? Are you against having to pay for housing? Are you saying that homeowners should rent out spare rooms in their houses for free? Are you against renting in general? What about for people who want the freedom to move from place to place and prefer that renting can provide that?
I’m not even sure where to begin. Neither of those, VPN nor Bitcoin, allow you to earn money simply by owning property. Both of them can be used legally and illegally, but that has nothing to do with landlords which are always able to rent out their property completly legally but are still always being a parasite. I’m not saying renting should be banned because one kind of landlords are evil and the others aren’t. I’m saying the mechanism of profiting off of property while exploiting the need for housing puts all of them on a spectrum between siphoning off a little or siphoning off a lot of the workers income.
I don't think it's a bad analogy. Both VPNs and Bitcoin have the same underlying mechanism, they can be used for good (avoiding censorship by authoritarian regimes) and they can be used for bad (doing illegal things). There can be good landlords and there can definitely be bad landlords. Even if it's not a perfect analogy, it's still similar enough to show the similarities to your analogy.
If you're not saying renting should be banned because one kind of landlords are evil and the others aren't, what are you saying? I don't understand your position here, sorry. You are calling it "profiting off of property while exploiting the need for housing", but how can you say that an older man providing a spare room is "exploiting the need for housing" in the same way that bad landlords (such as corporations) that are evil, do the bare minimum, can't wait for an excuse to jack up rent prices or evict someone for another person who will pay more etc are exploiting the need for housing? How is the older man renting out a spare room considered exploiting the need for housing versus considered providing a place to stay? Would it be better if spare rooms were not up for rent and thus there was even less housing available in a housing crisis?
If renting shouldn't be banned, what do you propose? Are you really suggesting that homeowners provide spare rooms for people to stay for free, or are you suggesting something else? You're going to have to explain your thoughts to me if you want me to understand.
I just found an article (from 1955) by my grandma where she argued that she prefers renting over building a house because she has more freedom that way. She can move more easily because she doesn't have to find a buyer for her house, she doesn't have to worry about something breaking because that's on the landlord to fix and she doesn't have to go into debt to live somewhere.
As far as I know she never owned a home, always rented. But all her kids bought houses.
I had a coworker liked that. He enjoyed renting because it meant having fewer responsibilities.
I disagreed, and countered that renting means being more dependent on somebody else. Some landlords are excellent at responding to repair calls, but there are so many more that will leave you hanging for an indetermined amount of time, while leaks continue or appliances break. Personally, I'd rather not have the quality of life in my own home be dependent on someone who doesn't really care about me.
Sadly, I don't have much of a choice. I would prefer being able to pick my own repair people or just fix simple things myself. Alas, like so many others, I work full time but remain stuck in the rent trap. So much for freedom.
One of my coworkers said the same thing. After the third time they were forced to move they caved and bought a condo.
One of my big concerns is that access to psychological benefits of keeping a pet gets to be gatekept by the whims of someone else.
I'm also that coworker. Bought a 1995 build house in 2013, and sold it last year. Holy cost of maintenance. Roof, foundation, HVAC, plumbing, gutters, siding. We upgraded the windows too, so that was a choice, but nothing else was. Didn't have money for professional interior upgrades because we were maintaining the structure itself instead.
If I ever buy a house ever again, it will be a condo so I'm only responsible for the INSIDE. As of right now, after all that, I'm happy renting. I'm so disinterested with painting and whatnot, that it doesn't bug me to have white walls.
I do agree that the pet situation sucks though. We have 2 "aggressive breeds" that were strays we picked up off the street years ago (2016 and 2020), a Pit mix and a Dobie mix. Finding someone to rent to us with those was a chore. And for the few years we rented out our home (military. Lived in it while we were stationed there, rented it out for a few years, moved back in when we returned to the same duty station), we didn't have a breed restriction.
We're about to move across the country again, and I'm STOKED to be moving into an apartment. Rn we're renting a SFH and it has been so nice knowing that money we had saved up isnt about to disappear because the water heater broke or whatever.
FYI: You might "only" be responsible for what is inside your condo but you are 100% on the hook for the costs external to your unit.
Surfside in Miami has forced all of the Condos to re-imagine their finances. Some units are being hit with $100,000 Special Assessments to repair the foundation, or facade, or just keep sufficient balance. There is no way out of this except to sell. They can charge you whatever they want, whenever they want.
Also "external" problems are also yours. One of the 5 units above yours flood into yours? That's a civil problem between you and the whichever unit it is. Good luck finding them, and getting your money. Even if you get it. You still have to deal with the trouble.
Had condo suffer water damage 11 times in 8 years due to various reasons caused by units above. Basically on your own. Condo board is not getting involved. You get all the problems of someone else's lack of maintenance, and none of the benefits of your own maintenance.
Condo Fees went from $110/month to $930/month because 'fuck me' I guess. No control over that either. You can petition the board but it's full of old nosy fucks.
Oof, glad I read this so we know what questions to ask/red flags to look out for if we ever do pull the trigger on purchasing a condo!
COA fees going from $110 to $930 is fucking wildly crazy work. Did they at least tell you WHY it shot up like that?
And its also crazy that special assessments cab be billed for that high per unit. We'd be fucked! I thought the point of paying COA fees each month was supposed to spread the cost of maintenance around/ensure there are savings in the bank to cover major repairs!
People not understanding the actual cost of owning and maintaining a house is my only argument for landlords. Or if you maintain it yourself it's a knowledge and time requirement.
Not saying landlords did a great job maintaining the rentals I've lived in. But there was definitely a point in my life where renting made more sense than owning a house.
We really need more control on rent prices so only high density housing is rentable. Or something, I don't have answers for why my shitty house is worth 70% more than it was 5 years ago.
You don't need a Lord to maintain a property though. That is the function of a superintendent, which is a role small landlords sometimes assume, and yes that is a job that should be compensated.
But it has nothing to do with owning and rentseeking.
When I married my wife and she moved in we tried renting out her house with a property management company. She got one tenant and had that tenant for over 2 years with no complaints and we never raised the rent, just enough to cover taxes going up too.
But when we wanted to move to a larger house we gave her an 8 month notice we couldn't renew since the market is so bad and we needed to sell. And my wife wasn't profiting at all, she was still in the red from the repairs and setting up the house to rent out. We offered her like $10k off the price.
Anyway long story short, the tenant gave us hell for those 8 months, and when she moved out we found she never complained about anything because she ignored all the problems which made things worse and the house needed thousands of more dollars to prepare and sell.
She'll never try being a landlord again, she hated it and the tenant shit talked her "landlord" on Facebook all the time like she was some evil monster.
I don't know how anyone else does the landlord thing, this must be all the ones run by evil corporations.
This was a house my wife bought for like $150-180k originally.
Standard rent is at least 1-1.5% of current not original value per month and taxes are about that per year.
you probably bought for 150 you earned 100,000 when it ballooned up to 250k rented it for at least 2500 a month x24 months or 60,000 paid 6000 each to taxes and management pocketed another 48,000
When you sold realizing that cool 100k you naturally had to do all the repairs and upkeep you had been putting off so you ended up coming out of pocket for "thousands"
In the end you netted 140k for doing 10 hours work once whereas the median worker earns 200-250
You probably charged here so much to ensure you made the "market rate" eg people like you that she had no funds saved to actually move and you probably nickel and dimed her deposit away for stuff that was actually on you.
Where am I wrong?
Wow lots of assumptions here. My wife only rented it out enough to cover her expenses (mortgage, insurance, property management, etc). She only netted $100 a month as "profit" but that doesn't include taxes at the end of the year, and she was paying towards $6000 she owed to house repairs. It doesn't include repairs needed from normal wear and tear and tenant damage.
A lot of your assumptions are based on profit towards selling the house, which in this situation means its not sustainable on its own without you covering everything out of pocket.
The real kicker here is that her tenant made more money than my wife. The tenant was making at least $10,000/month per bank statements.
Your other comments are false also. State laws here are very clear on what can be charged as a deposit.
None of that was my point though, and I realize sharing that here on a meme was dumb on my part. I'm not looking for sympathy, I was just feeling a rare moment of sharing an experience often overlooked: two hard working people who independently buy a starter home, meet later, and one moves in with the other and tries to rent out their house. Landlords aren't always evil but your reply demonstrated all the immediate assumptions and biases. After all, why should anyone be allowed to own more than one home, right? Especially if they try to rent it out? I guess Air BNB is better.
A lot of us lived in rentals and heard talk about the dream of rental supplemental income, but it's not all it's cracked up to be and not really feasible without an insane rate or having enough cash to not pay a mortgage. It's probably why more companies are trying to buy up houses.
I have managed a building with 8 units before. Never again.
I once had a lady's ceiling collapse. I then come to learn she's been putting a bucket out to catch water for months, never told anyone about it. What should have been a quick 15 minute fix ended up being a total nightmare.
Had one dude who was a heroin addict. Kept flushing needles. The plumbing had to be taken apart multiple times to get his needles out.
Had a lady who kept adopting cats, wouldn't get them fixed. She would then let them out into the hall to spray the walls with what was basically straight ammonia, except grosser.
I could go on all day, trash fires, fucking litter, a phycological inability to break down cardboard. I think my blood pressure just spiked writing this.
You couldn't pay me to be a landlord. People are awful.
Yeah being a landlord makes you into the bad guy despite intentions. You'll always make back whatever "losses" you incurred in equity, because we have a crazy for profit housing market.
Landlord/renter is an abominable financial relationship.
If it's a longer term tenant, the landlord is actually disincentivized from fixing the AC, because they can fix the AC and jack the rent way up as soon as the old, abuse tenant inevitably leaves.
One of my friends suffered through this during the recent heat wave. They've been told there's no budget for AC despite a recent $50 rent hike.
Their landlord is an independently wealthy multimillionaire — they don't even need the money!
friend bought a house and was super excited about it. it cost her a pretty penny.
It had black mold and almost killed her children. The landlord claimed they had no idea (they did)
they left (sold the house) for more than what she paid for. This was in California, the housing market is completely and utterly f****
yeah typically when you buy a house you get it from a landlord....
do you think houses are sold on amazon?
Based on my experience, a house on the market is usally being sold by someone who lived in it. The seller being a landlord is plausible, but I'd usually just generically refer to that party as 'the seller'.
Landlords tend to hold on to their revenue streams harder than a person holds on to their own residence.
where does the person move to then after selling the house they live in? could it be...they have another house thus being a landlord?
you are right on the second part, though.
Usually they have moved into their new home and have their uninhabited house on the market trying to get rid of it.
Maybe I'm missing implication in another culture, but around me landlord specifically refers to someone owning a home that is being actively rented/leased by another. If you haven't had tenants, you aren't considered a landlord
Owning 1 extra property and renting: Okay
Owning apartment complex and renting: Okay
Owing millions of single family homes and duplexes and rent hiking/price hiking the entire market: not okay
Owning 1 slave: Okay
Owning a dozen slaves: Okay
Owning hundreds of slaves: not okay.
/s obviously
/uj
Of course slavery and landlordism aren't identical in every respect, but they both are based on a parasite class doing no work, and extracting labor value from people who do. Large-scale vs small-scale doesn't make landlording any more ethical.
You support this alternative with a completely different dynamic and incentives??
Another win for pithy internet hypocracy gotcha debatelord!
Moore, Sir Roger Moore...
Sir Roger Moore quotes of note.
Today I am completely opposed to small arms and what they can do to children. I played every role tongue-in-cheek because I don't really believe in that sort of hero. I don't like guns.To me, the Bond situations are so ridiculous, so outrageous. I mean, this man is supposed to be a spy and yet, everybody knows he's a spy. Every bartender in the world offers him martinis that are shaken, not stirred. What kind of serious spy is recognized everywhere he goes? It's outrageous. So you have to treat the humor outrageously as well. My personality is entirely different than previous Bonds. I'm not that cold-blooded killer type. Which is why I play it mostly for laughs.
My acting range? Left eyebrow raised, right eyebrow raised.
Ukraine Loses One of Two UH-60 Black Hawks in Iskander Strike
Ukraine Loses One of Two UH-60 Black Hawks in Iskander Strike
One of Ukraine's two U.S.-supplied UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters was reportedly destroyed by a Russian Iskander missile in a precision strike targeting military operations.PravdaReport
No, I'd say you do.
ohchr.org/en/press-releases/20…
osce.org/files/f/documents/f/a…
reuters.com/world/europe/russi…
mk.ru/politics/2014/07/04/fash…
Фашист-живодер из Петербурга приехал воевать за ополченцев ЛНР
Неонацист и живодер из Санкт-Петербурга Алексей Мильчаков по кличке «Фриц» скорее всего вступил в ополчение ЛНР.www.mk.ru
like this
Skua likes this.
parallels
parallel inventions in the 15th and 20th century:
- books (printed through the printing press) spread knowledge just like the internet does, allowing a facilitated and drastically accelerated exchange of ideas
- new transport methods allow new lands to be reached and new worlds to be explored. i wonder whether it is an accident that "spaceships" are called after ships
i wonder whether it is an accident that "spaceships" are called after ships
ship (plural ships)
- (nautical) A water-borne vessel generally larger than a boat.
- (chiefly in combination) A vessel which travels through any medium other than across land, such as an airship or spaceship.
Spaceship is a portmantau of space and ship, so nope 😀
Wanted: Introductory slides on the broad topic
Hello, I am looking for simple introductory information. In the direction of data protection, digital sovereignty, open source, data sovereignty, freedom of information, etc...
I would be very grateful for tips and recommendations! 😀
My main question is probably how do I introduce the topic in an interesting way to non-techy folks.
What's the best topic to start? What are some must known examples of how things go wrong?
I would try to use some scary things that would make people first really interested to it from the start, instead of proposing alternatives the second you talk to them.
Examples are countless try to inform yourself on the Edward Snowden leak to explain it to them, talk about the numerous spying techniques used by big tech.
Hope was at least a bit useful 😀
Is this for yourself?
A few months ago I thought about doing some workshops or presentations in my local area and asked a similar question about whether anyone had already put together something cohesive and as simple as possible but I couldn't find anything that quite fit the bill.
Maybe there is something already out there but if anyone wants to collaborate on making something let me know.
If I manage to get some slides together I'll gladly share them here!
The new age verifying app for the EU will only accept Google Play integrity for Android, de-facto banning any aftermarket OS like GrapheneOS
cross-posted from: sh.itjust.works/post/42943610
Taken from the readme of the app on github:
The current release provides only basic functionality, with several key features to be introduced in future versions, including:App and device verification based on Google Play Integrity API and Apple App Attestation
Additional issuance methods beyond the currently implemented eID based method.
These planned features align with the requirements and methods described in the Age Verification Profile.
There is an issue opened to remove this as it's basically telling us that to verify our age in the EU an American corporation has the last word, making it not only a privacy nightmare but a de-facto monopoly on the phone market that will leave out of the verification checks even the fairphone (european) with /e/os.
The new age verifying app for the EU will only accept Google Play integrity for Android, de-facto banning any aftermarket OS like GrapheneOS
Taken from the readme of the app on github:The current release provides only basic functionality, with several key features to be introduced in future versions, including:App and device verification based on Google Play Integrity API and Apple App Attestation
Additional issuance methods beyond the currently implemented eID based method.
These planned features align with the requirements and methods described in the Age Verification Profile.
There is an issue opened to remove this as it's basically telling us that to verify our age in the EU an American corporation has the last word, making it not only a privacy nightmare but a de-facto monopoly on the phone market that will leave out of the verification checks even the fairphone (european) with /e/os.GitHub - eu-digital-identity-wallet/av-app-android-wallet-ui
Contribute to eu-digital-identity-wallet/av-app-android-wallet-ui development by creating an account on GitHub.GitHub
I agree with most concerns here but as a professional prototypist... people do not seem to understand here and on related issues what "reference implementation" means.
This is NOT supposed to be used! By anybody! This is basically a technical demonstration that shows how it can be done at all.
Think of this as a test suite rather than software proper.
Again, this does not mean it's OK to even suggest that Google and Apple are in any way acceptable bottleneck. I do believe those are terrible choices. I do also believe relying on them just to do a proof of concept or technical demonstration is quite "lazy" but I also bet that this was necessary due to the scope of the project, e.g. "deliver us an app that works in 6 months on an average mobile phone". I really don't think they had discussion on accessibility, inclusion, etc.
So... yes, do keep track and be concerned but also don't conflate a proof of concept with a maintained app that will be required to be used on all EU citizen mobile phones next year.
Apparently they want everybody to get some sort of "EU wallet", that is, some digital signed identity which sounds super dystopian. But that's just what I read. It sounds like a complete disaster.
I feel like a productive way to address this would be to make a child mode mandatory for all operating systems, as some EU countries already did, and then to give parents a better incentive to actually enable it. For example, all end-user devices could be pressured into prominently showing an option to enable it when first booted up (without forcing your hand either way) so that it's hard to miss. There are so many other ways to improve this situation.
I found out recently that every android device asks if you will be using the device, or if a child will, as soon as you log in to the device for the first time. The funny part is that it asks AFTER you sign in, effectively linking to to that device, even if you're giving it to a 15 years old teen.
And that's why my kids only have Linux PCs, and phones that they use that belong to me, so I can take them away in case it's necessary (spoiler, they try to stay away from those phones as much as possible, lol).
Absolutely, it is a useful feature for technologically challenged parents, no doubt. However, this way of doing it (using any GAFAM related company or similar) exposes kids to data mining since way before they can make this decision (which most will likely choose to do it anyway, but that's besides the point). Now, what if these kids grow up to be privacy-minded adults? Their data is already in the hands of others without their consent, and we all know that once data is out there, there's nothing you can do to reel it back into privacy.
This issue is right up there with parents, or any acquaintances for that matter, uploading photos, videos and PII of our kids with titles like "my awesome nieces and nephews". My wife's sister was kicked out of my house because of this, and was banned from interacting with my kids for almost 2 years. The reason? I told her I do not allow my kids' pictures in social media, and she still did it (maybe thinking I would just bend over and take it).
It's up to each parent to protect the privacy of their children until they're old enough to choose for themselves. We are raising privacy-minded kids, but that's no guarantee that they will be privacy-minded when they are adults. The opposite also holds true. We should not expose our kids to any type of surveillance outside the parents, and even the parents' surveillance of their kids needs to have limits.
This is why I believe all of us with a little more sense and knowledge, should strive to advocate against this system. All it takes for bad people to win is for good people to do nothing.
Sorry for the slight tangent, but I agree with your response. Perhaps the best approach for technologically illiterate parents might be a child mode that runs a local filter list where it doesn't send everywhere your kid goes to some online service, or simply not allowing kids to go online unsupervised when they're not even teens yet. This is a solvable problem however, I feel like, at least more so than the server-side age checks.
It seems like the UK is now trying to make the nanny surveillance state part of all web forums, even outside of the UK: telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/… Apparently, lemmy.zip is now even blocking UK users. I wonder if it would help if more forums did that, to show where we are heading if nobody is standing up...
This article is interesting as well: eff.org/deeplinks/2025/07/just… My favorite quote is this one, "All methods for conducting age checks come with serious drawbacks. Approaches to verify a user’s age generally involve some form of government-issued ID document, which millions of people in Europe—including migrants, members of marginalized groups and unhoused people, exchange students, refugees and tourists—may not have access to. [...] Age assurance methods always impact the rights of children and teenagers: Their rights to privacy and data protection, free expression, information and participation."
Hundreds of websites to shut down under UK's 'chilling' internet laws
Community pages face closure as lengthy new rules ‘create disproportionate liability’James Titcomb (The Telegraph)
Thanks so much. It's refreshing to see how some people still have common sense.
In all honesty, I'm very tired of these invasions. But the reality is that this was created by us, parents, families, and tech corps and governments just saw the opening and walked right in.
Tech made us lazy, we fell into the bliss of convenience while entirely dropping our rights on their laps to do with as they wish. I'm guilty of that myself. I allowed Google home and Alexa devices into my home and used them all the time. Then it all clicked when I started seeing information on subjects that interested me, my wife and my kids all over the place, without even looking for them. I panicked bad when I realized something was very wrong, but the damage was already done.
This is what got me into the Privacy and security wagon, and it took me almost 8 years to revert that as much as possible and finally have some sense of safety (because some of that stuff is out there for good, and there's nothing any of us can do about it).
Now I keep a sort of digital fortress around my family and myself, and I not willing to let it go anymore. This has made our family much more interactive in real life while at the same time harder targets for tech corps and governments.
Evidently, there are some of these that are unavoidable for us common folk, but we can compartmentalize our lives in ways that it's harder, if not impossible to tie everything about us together into a single fully integrated profile. Yes, it requires work, time, money and missing out on some convenience, but the alternative is infinitely worse, full of unknown dangers that can affect us now or later.
Until most people are fully pushing back on all these dangers, it will only get way worse over time.
I believe that removing the possibility of profit for tech companies is the only way to effectively reverse this trend, however, most people are too distracted by all the screens around them and the carefully crafted content made precisely for this purpose to figure out what is really going on, and by the time we all end up figuring it out, it may very well be too late.
So, I would like to see less excuses by most people on how "it's too hard for most people", "some parents are not as tech savvy" and similar BS. That only helps keep the myth of "there's nothing I can do about it" I alive, which is what all these institutions are banking on.
What are all the files/folders that will be in the filesystem after initrd?
like what directories are shared to the real filesystem after initrd, or what files. Or is everything just inaccessible in the real filesystem from the initrd phase.
man switch_root
switch_root moves already mounted /proc, /dev, /sys and /run to newroot and makes newroot the new
root filesystem and starts init process.WARNING: switch_root removes recursively all files and directories on the current root filesystem.
If you look at the source code, it uses mount(2) with the MS_MOVE flag to move the /proc, /dev, /sys, /run to the new root, then deletes all the files on the old root fs recursively, then MS_MOVE-mounts the new root over the old one. As the comment in the source code points out:
/* Don't try to unmount the old "/", there's no way to do it. */
This is presumably why it deletes the files on the initrd, because it is a ram disk and the files would be eating up memory if left there.
util-linux/sys-utils/switch_root.c at master · util-linux/util-linux
Contribute to util-linux/util-linux development by creating an account on GitHub.GitHub
This Is What They Meant By Making America Great Again?
Kix cereal once offered 'Atomic Bomb Ring' with radioactive material as a promotion?
In 1947, Kix cereal ran a promotion for an "Atomic Bomb Ring" that contained radioactive polonium-210, one of the deadliest radioactive substances known to man.Jack Izzo (Snopes.com)
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
Kix cereal once offered 'Atomic Bomb Ring' with radioactive material as a promotion?
In 1947, Kix cereal ran a promotion for an "Atomic Bomb Ring" that contained radioactive polonium-210, one of the deadliest radioactive substances known to man.Jack Izzo (Snopes.com)
ebay.com/itm/127037035907?_skw…
400 bucks, not bad
Lone Ranger Atomic Bomb Ring Kix Cereal 1947 Promotion Premium | eBay
Lone Ranger Atomic Bomb ring with an aluminum warhead and red plastic tailfin mounted on a gold colored adjustable band with lightning bolts on each side.eBay
Apparently it flopped because it didn't explode like the chemistry kits did, so kids thought it was boring.
Community to ask for community names, like a directory
I'm looking for somewhere where I can ask for a topic and have suggestions and be redirected to a fitting community if one exists
If there's a community for this, can someone share it? Thanks
Btw the topic I'm searching for is wireless (bluetooth) earbuds, thanks!
!buyitforlife@slrpnk.net maybe?
Outside of the community search, there's not a good place to ask about a community other than maybe !asklemmy@lemmy.ml
If electronic in any way, the item must be open source
That sub should be ruled out then
Thanks for asklemmy, will check, though it doesn't seem to fit
Hi, mod of Buyitforlife here!
The rule you quoted only applies to people self promoting their own products to sell there, they do not apply for recommending something or asking for suggestions for something. Feel free to make a post there about earbuds!
Thanks
Already knew it and community names aren't straightforward sometimes, so I was looking for somewhere to ask people
Some you might try 👍
!communitypromo@lemmy.ca
!helpmefind@lemmy.ml
!wowthislemmyexists@lemmy.ca
10 downvotes in an hour yet not one comment.
Guess they can't actually explain it after all.
the left side of the meme:
elciudadano.com/en/nato-and-it…
not too familiar with the right side tbh
NATO and its links with Nazism
Some of NATO 's senior commanders came from being senior military commanders of German Nazism and very close to Adolf Hitler.Ronald Ángel (El Ciudadano, Noticias de Chile y Latinoamérica para el Mundo)
I'm sure that's how you were taught in (presumably) Canada, but that's not what happened. The Soviets spent the previous decade trying to form an anti-Nazi alliance with Britain, France, etc, who had instead signed non-agression pacts with Nazi Germany. It wasn't until the eve of wartime that the Soviets agreed to a non-agression pact with the Nazis to buy time before the inevitable war.
The Soviets expected it. The Nazis attacked the Soviets just like everyone knew they would, because the Nazis wanted to commit genocide on the Slavs and because Nazism is inerently anti-communist, and communism inherently anti-fascist, as communism is proletarian and fascism is bourgeois.
Harry Truman, in 1941 in front of the Senate, stated:
If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible, although I don’t want to see Hitler victorious under any circumstances.
The West wanted the Nazis to exterminate the communists.
Why then had the Munich men refused all through the Spring and Summer to accept the only terms for an alliance with Russia which could mean anything to Russia? It was, says Schuman, because “all preferred the destruction of Poland to the Soviet defence of Poland. All hoped that the sequence would be a German-Soviet war over the spoils.” Is this a too stern judgment? It fits Ambassador Henderson, who told Hitler, on August 23, that he preferred a German-Soviet agreement to an Anglo-Soviet agreement.
Emphasis mine.
The Cold War & Its Origins, Vol. I, Denna F. Flemming, 1961, Chapter V
Kremlin reveals details of Putin-Netanyahu call
Kremlin reveals details of Putin-Netanyahu call
The Russian and Israeli leaders discussed the situation in Syria, as well as the recent escalation between West Jerusalem and TehranRT
Whitelist community on blocked instance?
Hi, I have lemmy.world blocked for browsing purposes because you know, it's mostly trash.
However, I want to post a question in !summit@lemmy.world because I'm having an issue with the app where I can't seem to access the toggle to hide posts from bot accounts.
Is there a way to whitelist a niche community without unblocking the instance it's on?
Survival Skills Are Important
Do Quokkas Actually Throw Their Babies At Predators?
This question started as an online joke, and as time went on, people started taking it seriously. The answer to the question isn’t that simple, however. Firstly, it should be noted that no, quokkas don’t throw their babies at predators. That is a joke, but it is somewhat based on reality. Quokkas keep their young in their pouches, and while fleeing from predators, babies are known to fall out and are then left there by their parents.
The thing that is interesting here is that the part where they fall out of the pouch may be done on purpose by the mothers. Research shows that this may be an actual anti-predator characteristic of quokkas. They normally have very strong control over the muscles in their pouches, so their response to the threat of predators may be to release those muscles. The babies are left there to attract the attention of the predator, and the parents can safely escape. Mothers want to save themselves because they have proven that they are fertile, while the young might not be.
That this is a controversial opinion explains so much about human society. You're a bunch of self deluding quokkas.
Not to mention detached from reality. Every mother risks her life to give birth.
E.g. fish disagree by and large.
People often read agendas where they may not be in simple but definitive phrase like that, especially if they seem similar to things people with agendas say.
For instance, someone might think you're making a strong anti-abortion statement, including blaming women for wanting to have sex, but your statement doesn't mention any of that. I could see a "pro-life"anti-abortion person saying that statement as a way of saying a woman should choose to die giving birth rather than getting an abortion, but I could also see it being the exact opposite argument in that if you don't want to risk your life, get an abortion instead of having the kid.
In either case, people with opposing opinions may read what they dislike in your comment and downvote it. So it might explain something completely different about human society.
if you don’t want to risk your life, get an abortion instead of having the kid.
Would strongly agree with that.
yep, there's this weird trend to demonise cute animals.
you can't even fucking mention koalas on reddit without some arsehole telling us they all have chlamydia every 53 seconds.
according to them, all dolphins suck, all ducks are shit, and all cute little marsupials who never harmed a fly are secretly evil incarnate.
what if all humans were judged by the actions of some humans? that's a frying pan i'd rather not be in...
what's a good supported cpu temperature application for debian 12.11?
Say Goodbye to the Internet as We Know It
Say Goodbye to the Internet as We Know It ━ The European Conservative
Intrusive age-verification checks under the UK’s Online Safety Act are the latest step towards total censorship of the web.Lauren Smith (The European Conservative)
like this
Maeve likes this.
Dude you're on the instance where it is forbidden in worldnews to say "Fuck (a particular country which will remain nameless)".
Literally the only one. You can say "Fuck the United States" or "Fuck Israel" everywhere on Lemmy, or near enough, which of course is as it should be. But if I start stepping on the wrong massive state actors' toes from one particular instance...
The difference is that communists accept the need for censorship and are open about why some ideas need to be suppressed.
Because some ideas are so destructive to your whole model that they have to be suppressed, because these models in their practical application are often sort of un-defendable, and so the only option is to have secret police running around shooting dissidents.
It doesn't mean that liberal democracies don't fall into the exact same pattern, to some extent large or small. It is in the nature of human power struggle. It's not innate to any particular political system (or it is innate to all of them because they're all made of people). The difference is that we don't celebrate it or make excuses for it. We publish books about what a lie the government is telling, we have a constant struggle between the forces of freedom in the streets and the government trying to stamp it out. Sometimes different factions get the upper hand, or it switches.
The difference, as you brilliantly demonstrated here, is that some of the most thickheaded of communist supporters get themselves turned around sufficiently that they start supporting the government trying to stamp it out. Most sensible people, when the government tells them that some ideas need to be suppressed, and they need to imprison or shoot anyone who's opposing their power, can figure out that's a bad thing. You apparently cannot.
don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
The difference is that we don’t celebrate it or make excuses for it.
Except you do constantly make excuses for it, as you brilliantly demonstrated here. You want to pretend that you support more freedoms than communists, but in practice you just champion your own set of capitalist values.
Okay, this is clearly going to be a waste of time. Tell you what: You're clearly never going to admit that you're wrong about this, and obviously I can't force you. It seems like you're actually sort of enjoying how easy it is just to keep typing "freedom is an illusion anyway and that's why I had all the opposition shot and that makes perfect sense" and similar things and no one can stop you.
Let's do this: Tell me a format within which we can have this conversation, and get some kind of feedback or judgement about who it is that's able to prove their case. If you want to propose a framing of some sort, and go within that, I'm happy to talk about it with you. If not, I think it's just going to be you insisting that Stalin-style/Trump-style governance is justified until I get bored or frustrated and abandon the conversation.
I'm not a debate pervert. I've made my point clearly here already. I don't need to convince you of anything. The fact that you use Trump and Stalin in the same sentence shows profound ignorance on your part. There is no point attempting to have a discussion with people who have strong opinions on subjects they have no understanding of. I'll leave you with what the CIA had to say on the subject. I would hope you'd use this as an opportunity to educate yourself, but I know that you will not.
I'm not a debate pervert.
I mean it definitely sounds like you are lol
The fact that you use Trump and Stalin in the same sentence shows profound ignorance on your part.
They both aspire to throw their domestic enemies into a network of shadowy prison camps or kill them outright, they both claim the establishment opposition needs to be disposed of, they both claim that censorship is necessary because some ideas are wrong and the leader needs to be in control so he can keep the wrong ideas away. There are some important differences, too, but certainly they belong in the same sentence. Trump's just a lot less effective, is actually the main difference I see.
There is no point attempting to have a discussion with people who have strong opinions on subjects they have no understanding of.
Sounds good! Let me check your qualifications, that's a really good point, I did have a sense that there was no point to having this conversation with you, and this sort of gets to the heart of why lol.
- What did Stalin have done to most of the KPD members who fled Hitler to the Soviet Union?
- Why did the USSR ultimately collapse? What should be done differently to raise up the next massive wonderful communist state? Or nothing, they did everything fine?
- Which direction did people generally flee across the Berlin wall? Why?
- How would you characterize China's modern government, in one or two words? Marxist, communist, gangster-capitalist, what?
don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
It's okay if you don't know! I think you do, though, at least most of these answers you are probably aware of. I'll make them simpler so there's no time needed to put together a little essay or anything (which is probably better anyway, since it'll be less subjective). One or two word answers.
- What did Stalin have done to most of the KPD members who fled Hitler to the Soviet Union?
- Which country currently embodies what you'd like to see, as the successful Communist model to emulate?
- Which direction did people generally flee across the Berlin wall?
- How would you characterize China's modern government, in one or two words?
I know, I know, you don't want to participate. It's easier just to talk down to me and soapbox, and from that format you can really easily refuse to analyze things that you don't want to analyze that undo your mental models if you do analyze them. But there's no reason you would be unwilling just to admit the answers, since your model is super-correct and I'm the wrong one.
Up to you
I just love how you keep acting like these questions haven't been answered time and again. As if you came up with some novel line of questioning nobody has ever thought before. Go read a book for once in your life. Here's one you can start with. welshundergroundnetwork.cymru/…
And here's how people who actually live in China characterize their modern government in one or two words. If you spent as much time educating yourself on the subjects you wish to debate instead of making a clown of yourself in public, you wouldn't have to ask questions like this and em brass yourself.
- newsweek.com/most-china-call-t…
- csmonitor.com/World/Asia-Pacif…
- bloomberg.com/opinion/articles…
- web.archive.org/web/2023051104…
- tbsnews.net/world/china-more-d…
- web.archive.org/web/2020122913…
You're like a living embodiment of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
Studies have shown that China is more democratic than the United States, Russia is nearby, and Ukraine is “at the bottom”
No matter how American politicians and the media criticize “totalitarian” China, there are far more people among US citizens who consider their country undemocratic.ignatova (English News front)
Were you under the impression I thought I was the first person to come up with these ideas or questions? In history? No, the point is that you don't want to answer them, not that they were somehow untouched by scholarship.
I'm happy to make the same offer for you, you can try to expose the flaws in my thinking by trying to ask questions I really don't want to admit the answers to or am just unaware of.
But like I say, it's clear that you prefer soapboxing to that sort of interactive discussion (even the Playskool version of it with one word answers). I wonder why...
The point is that I, and many other people, have answered these questions many times. If you're personally ignorant on the subject, then spend the time to educate yourself. You can start with the materials I've provided you. It's not my job to educate you. I perfect having interactive discussion with people who understand the subject they're discussing and want to have a discussion in good faith. It's very transparent that you are not.
I'll let you have the last word here which you so desperately need.
Bye.
You can write fuck China on Lemmy.ml if it's relevant and motivated. The difference is that it's always obvious why the USA and Israel should be condemned. I think China's Israel stance is super weak, and I doubt I'd get mod pushback for saying that in an article about how China keeps selling genocide-equipment to Israel during a genocide. Or about how China is pushing for a two-state solution instead of saying Israel is illegitimate and should be dismantled.
If you go "Fuck Cameroon" on an unrelated post, for example this one, a mod would rightly tell you to be civil or at least explain yourself. And if you then justify yourself on a basis of white supremacy or conspiracy theories as you are bound to do, then that reasoning will be rejected.
I have read maybe half, and the cringe in this piece is intense.
Imagine plauding Musk’s commitment to maintaining free speech on X.
I mean, there are problem with the DSA and there are plenty with Online Safety Act, but maybe try to SIMP for fascist Big Tech a little more discreetly?
The ruling British class, sure. The average British citizen is impacted by this, rather than enacting the change though.
It's kind of like how a select few people in the states decide healthcare shouldn't be affordable, and everyone else just has to accept it; despite living in one of the richest countries in the history of the human race.
The reality is both nations have the same group of people pulling the strings behind the scenes; anyone who believes they have any say in either country is either not paying attention, or an idiot.
The billionaire tech class was created by the Internet and are actively damaging the world for their own personal gain.
I hate to tell you but there were billionaires and multi-millionaires way before the internet and they were damaging the world horrendously for greed and personal gain. They even have this system structured around allowing them to do that called capitalism.
So no the internet didn't create that. Capitalism created that. Just as it created the climate change denial oil industry and the people who made money off of destroying the planet with that and would still be doing so without the internet. Just as it made dishonest press barons who loved Nazi Germany such as Randolph Hearst way before the internet existed and for a more modern example Rupert Murdoch. Just as before that it created incentives to hide and denial tobacco caused cancer or that asbestos caused cancer and other diseases or that lead poisoned us especially children. And on and on. Or the Triangle Shirt-waist fire and thousands of incidents just like that around the world where people are killed in poorly maintained factories kept that way out of greed. Or companies that pump poison into the water and air because it's cheaper. I could go on forever.
I see the modern internet as sometime in the early 2010s when YouTube shifted heavily towards monetisation and changing up the UI for that, Facebook started to shift from VC money to monetizing the platform culminating in its post-IPO super monetization. Facebook buying Instagram and then eventually monetizing it heavy with advertisements
Facebook IPO, YouTube profitability push from Google, Instagram profitability push from Facebook. That all came together to birth the modern online influencer. An incredibly fast rapid shift from a short decade of body acceptance and mild movements against over consumption to now 6th graders have skincare routines and therapy shopping seems bigger than it has ever been
I thought I was the only one pondering on this. It's been a wild ride and I'm so glad I got to take part in the 90s, when web 1.0 was wild and free. What a blast that was.
But it's over now, we've ruined it, like we ruin everything, and I hope soon we'll all be collectively ready as a species to dance on the grave of our dead internet.
F
For real, people have plenty of reasons to be pissy with AI, but if it has the power to destroy the current internet, there are massive silver linings.
Sadly whatever replaces it will be even worse.
this has nothing to do with ai though
watch this if you can't read ☞ techlore - The UK Just Broke the Anonymous Internet
- YouTube
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.www.youtube.com
Yeah. I can't stay away completely, but it is unquestionable how much better I am in general when I spend more free time outside versus in front of a screen.
Edit: I don't mean to make screens sound like the bad guy. It's more about engaging all of your senses and interacting with 100% of your immediate environment, rather than keeping your vision and mind focused on the 24/7 fire hose of only the 0.001% most potent triple-distilled negativity sourced from the entire fucking planet.
The internet is like having omnipotence but only for the knowledge that messes with our brains. We don't get to see all the nice shit from across the planet 50x a day.
The billionaire tech class was created by the Internet
No. You had tech billionaires before the internet as well.
Wait I don't understand. Did they cancel https? How about ftp?
Ssh?
Or are they requiring some half baked bullshit in a browser to catch the lowest common denominator?
I haven't click to submit anything at any point, does it just ask for an image?
I'm fine with looking like him as far as porn is concerned. Probably help me in fact, lol.
Bender-Meme:
*Selfhosters:
I build my own Internet
With Blackjack and Hookers
You joke but it would be great if we could restart the web. No bots, no corps, you have to be a nerd to get in. Maybe some specific protocol where you need a certain modem to access it, to keep other people out...
Maybe this is what the dark web is? I haven't dabbled.
Ah, I’m not giving a full picture there. Technically you can use layered encryption like tor uses on the clearnet. Tor additionally exposes tor-only services that route exclusively via tor’s onion routing (not just http wrapped inside an encryption onion).
i2p works differently under the hood, but the shared piece is exclusive services, only accessible through a non-standard protocol. That’s how you’d get a different web. Unless we’re talking physical layer stuff.
this community is dead, the day Canada, U.S. and Eu asks lemmy to "verify" our ages
or we're all on a vpn connected to a server in ??? Mongolia?
[FIX]I need help rescue my archlinux system
Hi all,
Today my system was working fine until I reboot. It do not boot into my desktop anymore. It boot into shell.
It look like this:
I am not really an expert in file system, so I am not really sure what is the first step or is this recoverable. Which mean I will need a lot of help from you guys. Any help would be appreciated thanks.
I followed this fix blog.fyralabs.com/btrfs-corrup…
Critical Advisory: Btrfs Corruption Issues
A recent kernel has introduced an issue that causes Btrfs filesystems to corrupt themselves.Jaiden Riordan (Cats on a Keyboard)
Increased reports since 6.15.3 of corruption within the log tree
Seems like a btrfs bug. Bunch of links in that thread with similar reports and screenshots. They also include the suggested fix.
Increased reports since 6.15.3 of corruption within the log tree — Linux BTRFS
Linux BTRFS Storage: Increased reports since 6.15.3 of corruption within the log treewww.spinics.net
First
lsblk to get the list of block devices (you can use size to figure out your file system)
Then:
mount -o remount,rw /dev/${name found in previous step} /
Then check for bad entries in your /etc/fstab and fix them
Then check for failed services:
systemctl —failed
Then you should be able to:
systemctl set-default graphical.target to boot
This is the painful part I don't know why my fstab is nuked. It is completely empty. I am writing it rn and it is painful. I have a question to ask tho. After I finish writing it what do I do? Do I reboot?
Edit: Okay after I finish the fstab I do mount -a it did not work. ;). I am not sure if what I did is good though. I just copy fstab of a new installation of arch on my laptop and change the UUID
You don’t need to use the uuid for /etc/fstab (which should make it much easier)
You don’t need to reboot just set the run level via:
systemctl set-default graphical.target
But you will want to clear out the failed systemd services first to ensure that you can boot.
systemctl --failed will list what failed
After you make your /etc/fstab
systemctl daemon-reload will regenerate the units files in /run/systemd/generator but doesn't start new automounts or stop ones removed from fstab.
systemctl start newmount.automount will start the mount. The .automount extension is required, as systemd assumes .service if not extension is specified.
systemctl stop oldmount.automount will remove a mount not longer in fstab
systemctl reset-failed will stop a previously failed removed mount from appearing in status messages
'A Cruel and Transparent Farce': Israeli Attacks Kill 62 in Gaza Amid 'Tactical Pause'
Israel announced a plan to institute a daily 10-hour "tactical pause" in fighting from 10:00 am to 8:00 pm local time in the populated Gaza localities of Gaza City, Deir al-Balah, and Muwasi, as The Associated Press explained.
However, on Sunday—the first day of the supposed pause—Israeli attacks killed a total of 62 people, Al Jazeera reported, including 34 who were seeking humanitarian relief. Another six people died of hunger, bringing the total death toll from starvation and malnutrition to 133, including 87 children, according to the Gaza Health Ministry.
'A Cruel and Transparent Farce': Israeli Attacks Kill 62 in Gaza Amid 'Tactical Pause'
"There is nothing humane or tactical about letting a trickle of aid in after a man-made famine has started while continuing to bomb starving men, women, and children, even in so-called safe zones," one advocate said.oliviarosane (Common Dreams)
what's a good, reliable thermal paste for an Intel® Core™ i7-7500U on a clevo?
cpu: Intel® Core™ i7-7500U CPU @ 2.70GHz, version: 6.142.9, size: 3268MHz, capacity: 3500MHz, width: 64 bits
also, if you could link a reliable guide for a newbie and your personal tricks to apply...
If you can afford it, Honeywell PTM7950. It's very stable and avoids pump out, which is great in a laptop where you don't want to repaste very often. It's a phase change material, not a standard paste. To apply, put it the fridge to cool. Afterwards, cut to size and put it on. Once it warms up, it liquefies to fill all the small gaps.
Otherwise, most other pastes are fine. I'm partial to Arctic MX-4 but they're all pretty the similar. On direct die like a mobile chip I would recommend spreading it out to ensure even coverage as gaps can cause hotspots which may eventually damage the chip.
I would recommend anything Thermal Grizzly:
thermal-grizzly.com/
Simply because the owner has two 1 hour long videos explaining how its made and tested and it actually seems to be one of the best.
Willkommen im Thermal Grizzly Online Shop
Der Thermal Grizzly Online Shop ist die erste Anlaufstelle für unsere Wärmeleitpasten, Flüssigmetalle, Wasserkühler, Wärmeleitpads und vieles mehr!Thermal Grizzly
Just get a thick thermal paste. By and large any thermal paste is an improvement over stock. Thicker pastes like arctic mx6 won't pump out. I like ic diamond 7 karat but that's out of stock. (all I have left is a random tube of it that I found in storage)
(I do mean any thernal paste is better than stock. I used arctic ceramique 3 once on my i5-7200u laptop and it was still 3C lower than og psste temps)
When I repasted my i5-1135G7 laptop, I dropped 10C after replacing the paste.
All you really need is a tiny blob, one covering the igpu die, other on the cpu.
Mobile CPUs (any any direct-die cooling for that matter) are more prone to pump-out, where the chip and heatsink expand at different rates with temperature changes, and the varying gap between the two creates a pumping action. It's best to use a thicker paste to avoid it, or even better, a thermal pad. Not that it's the best in the long run, but I have gotten away with the thinner MX-4 in my laptop for about a year.
If you have maybe $30 to spare, consider buying some PTM 7950 since it's second only to liquid metal (very hard to get right), and should be good for many years. Be sure to get it from reputable sellers though since there are fakes for PTM 7950.
Thermal paste is all the same. Anything marketing different is just marketing.
The paste doesn't help dissipate heat, just act as a conduit to do so. If you're in a laptop, you're stuck with what fits.
Caveat, any reputable brand of thermal paste is basically the same. I've experienced many cheapo brands, especially stuff included with cheapo hardware, that had texture issues or nearly liquefied at high temperatures and made a mess. Also, had one that evaporated partly and tested positive for lead, so not the most healthy. Though one time is not a big deal, it is a big deal if you used it a lot.
Anyway, stick to reputable brands and most are the same. Slight differences are usually in max temperature, but that doesn't really apply to computer hardware much, but does affect some other moderately high temperature hardware that needs even cooling that I work with, like 3D printing.
Halnziye HY-P15
- Thermal conductivity is the key. Most brands don't mention it
Why do atomic distros not contain good backup tooling by default?
I have tested a lot of atomic and traditional distributions lately. Tons of desktop environments strictly for fun and branching out. Having a 1 2 3 backup strategy and not just having it in place, but being able to restore your backup in a timely manner to keep continuity is paramount. You can list infinite reasons why.
Why do atomic distros which are supposed to me more stable, superior to some degree immutable environments lack good backup options? You can hack things together and there are somewhat installable tools. Like timeshift or etc etc. But it seems they place a lot more emphasis on rolling back poor updates in the event than total system backups.
By default it you should have true backups then layer in rollbacks. Not the other way around. Am I missing something?
Okay, so let me break down what I THINK is happening here, which is that you might have a misunderstanding of what what atomic/immutable means.
First, these are made to separate OSspace from UserSpace. Whatever you keep in UserSpace is your responsibility.
Second, the actual running OS is built on layers like containers. The hash of what your OSspace is can be readily gotten to compile the exact same version of it from the repos that hold the presompiled versions of these things. Just like containers.
Third, you don't need to backup any of the OS because of the above.
Lastly, the general idea is that since you don't need to backup anything about the OS, and you should be able to checkout a hash of some sort that can download and be eventually bit-consistant with the OS layer, all you have to worry about is the UserSpace content.
How you manage the UserSpace content is up to you. Back your stuff up, start a bare machine and check the OS out to a specific revision where your previous machine was at, then drop your UserSpace stuff in, and it will "just work".
What I am understanding from the atomics are that your view is right with caveats. Flatpaks only write to /home. But not all apps or software are flatpak. There is no standard for where apps write in Linux so some apps get wrote to system, some apps write to /home. Which allows creep and data scatter throughout a system.
It seems with traditional systems you gain good backups that are easy to redeploy should you need them. But config drift can creep up, updates break more easily, and rollbacks require up to date snapshots.
Atomics make rollbacks easier, but backups harder and more complex during restorations due to fragmented backup locations for different types of files. Also apps don't always play well with say SElinux on fedora but it's rare take Mullvad for instance its not a flatpak and they primarily update as. Deb or similar. Requiring distrobox or toolbox. Which is a whole other level of complexity.
I am basically trying to discern if I should go immutable or traditional OS install. Things sound great on paper. But daily driving is a different story.
I want security by default, sandbox/containerized apps, Wayland native, with solid backup support infrastructure. So not if but when and I do it often testing backups or re-deploying a machine. I can boot back in as close to never left as I can.
So continuity is paramount. I been eyeing fedora kiniote, fedora workstation KDE, Debian likely KDE. Only because cinnamon isn't Wayland native yet and likely won't be for a while.
Edit: Currently I been running NIXos. It's been great but config only backups up system apps and not data or app state. However even under /home backups you'll still lose system files unless their manually tracked and synced as well. It's one giant hassle. I used to clonezilla but my search for other DEs and OSes that scratched the itch for stock Mints flaws has still evaded me.
Edit nvm you mentioned NixOS.
I'm pretty sure ublues variants of atomic have easy backup features 🤔 but yes this is one issue that needs to be addressed by a distro, not sure if it exists entirely without setting each install methods working directory manually
I think you misunderstand the point of atomic still. Your base system should be installed entirely through ublue or other. Every time you update ublue will hash it and you can go back to that exact config with a working base system. Flatpaks and distrobox are user applications and should store all the data they need somewhere under your /home. Back up your /home and /etc with rsync or similar. When all is said and done your be able to recreate your system with ublue, and restore your configs and personal files with rsync.
The advantages of ublue is you can easily share or restore your base system without needing to backup gigabytes of data every update
Timeshift is completely unnecessary. Fedora Atomic's rollbacking is more powerful and avoids certain issues.
You should only be backing up personal files, not OS files. The OS is replaceable, your personal files are not.
I've been backing up my OS and my personal files with borg to my NAS.
Saved me a weekend of setup and config editing once before, when my drive failed.
Or do you just remember all the config changes you did and type them out from the top of your head? And all the apps you have installed? It's over 300 apps and 100 config files for me.
The OS is tiny compared to personal files. It doesn't make sense not to back it up.
Or do you just remember all the config changes you did and type them out from the top of your head? And all the apps you have installed? It's over 300 apps and 100 config files for me.
Well, kinda. I have have scripts to set up most of my system after an installation. It’s nice so that I don’t have to remember everything I’ve done. It means I can reinstall my system or install on a new system with relative ease.
Doesn’t need to be anything complex. Just having a list of packages I want installed and that I can copy into my terminal makes things so much faster.
I install or configure something every week.
In addition to doing the config, I'd have to edit a script as well, which seems like more hassle. At this point, why not go for nixOS and have just the latter part of the hassle without having to also edit config files in / ?
Instead, I run the backup command after I change something. When I want to restore, I can mount any of the last 20 backups from the borg repo and either manually revert a file or use rsync to mass overwrite.
I was thinking of using btrfs send, which would probably be even better for the purposes of recovering from disk failure, but borg file based backup takes way less space and works well so far. And I don't have the extra effort of a declarative os or setup scripts.
Also works offline as long as I am with my NAS unlike a script that installs a list of packages from the repos.
I’ve never tried an immutable OS, but I’d love if the ability to do system backups and redeploy to another computer was just part of any OS.
Especially when Linux encourages you to distro hopp.
Clonezilla is great but it already happened to me that one backup wasn’t deployable on another (really old) computer
That kinda exists with NixOS, but you'd have to backup your personal files separately.
You're not really backing up the OS with NixOS, but the nix configuration file describes how the OS is built in a reproducible way.
Yeah. I’ve used NixOS and think the idea is cool, but overall I prefer Fedora Atomic. Unlike NixOS, it’s a complete OS out of the box and is less quirky than NixOS. Though I am a proponent of Flatpak, those who don’t like it will have a very different opinion of Fedora Atomic.
I just wish Fedora Atomic was more declarative and that bootc could work a bit closer to how NixOS's nix.conf worked. I would love if that there was a a container file could be declared and used built similarly to nix.conf is (avoiding the user manually building the and signing the container file).
Fam, I loathe saying this, but -please- if you desire engagement, then at least put some honest effort into proofreading your writings before posting them. I'm just assuming stuff at this point because I can barely grasp your intent/writing. *sigh*
Why do atomic distros which are supposed to me more stable, superior to some degree immutable environments lack good backup options? You can hack things together and there are somewhat installable tools. Like timeshift or etc etc.
Which distros even come by default -so installed OOTB- with "good backup options"? Which atomic distros is this statement even based on?
But it seems they place a lot more emphasis on rolling back poor updates in the event than total system backups.
Because their atomicity barely goes beyond updates. The 'atomic' in "atomic distros" mostly describes how its updates are atomic; i.e. the system either updates successfully or doesn't update at all. Thus, by design, we have two possible states after an update: a 'successfully' updated system or a 'failed' update resulting in the same state as the previous. Atomic distros aren't smart enough to catch all 'breakage' occurred by 'successful' updates. As such, most of these breakages will only show them after trying to boot into updated system. Deleting/erasing the previous known good state without verifying that the new/upcoming state works well is foolish. Especially on a distro that's got robust updates otherwise. Hence, the functionality of rollbacks on updates is almost trivially done/applied to atomic distros, as it (almost) follows by design.
So, what I'm interested in is the following:
- Are you familiar with the notion of stateless systems? Is this (perhaps) what you're (actually) seeking?
By default it you should have true backups then layer in rollbacks. Not the other way around. Am I missing something?
I think my previous paragraph should be enlightening in this regard. If you disagree (or something/otherwise), then please feel free to elaborate why you think so. Btw, what do you even mean with "true backups?
Based on their post history, I strongly suspect the OP has English as a non-primary language.
While I believe your intent and attempt is noble, in OP's comment history we find their admittance to being American.
Furthermore, I'd argue their history actually suggests that they're very much capable of writing perfectly sound English. In fact, this isn't my first interaction with OP. So I know they can do better. But, for whatever reason, they haven't demonstrably shown the same diligence when writing up this particular post.
They are doing fine, their posts are perfectly understandable.
The bold part is probably directly targeting the "proofreading your writings before posting them"-part of my original comment. And I'll admit that I should have done a better job at conveying that this doesn't intend to allude to a structural problem. So, to be clear, it was meant as general advice after being bothered by (only) this post.
::: spoiler Uno Reverse
Outwardly suspecting ESL for native speakers ain't nice either, but I digress...
:::
There are plenty of Americans who don't speak English as a primary language, but you might be correct that they are simply not being diligent with their proofreading.
Either way, they're perfectly understandable IMO, but it's also valid to be frustrated with someone writing differently. I still don't think it's constructive to chastise them for it.
How bad is my partitioning?
I just got a new laptop and installed Linux on it. I mainly run OpenSUSE.
Getting full encryption on both was a bit of a challenge and I had no idea what I'm doing. Will having the swap partition in the middle break things? Did I really need so many partitions (Mint and OpenSUSE don't show up in eachother's boot menu)?
I'm probably not gonna change this layout (because reinstallation seems like a pain) unless the swap partition's position is a problem. I'm just curious how many mistakes I made.
EDIT: I'm not upgrading my drive capacity. I do not need it.
I think the partitioning itself is fine, but I wouldn't have 3 operating systems on a 256 GB NVMe, because I'd be running out of space a lot.
if you won't ever use Windows, you can nuke it. Then I'd consider making one of the Linux ones a VM - if you're trying out that distro. That will cut down 12 partitions to 5.
Lastly, you can look into btrfs to make better use of space between (the current) p11 and p12: you can make them subvolumes that won't eat up each other's storage when not in use.
like this
osaerisxero likes this.
I'm only have about 20GB of files so I think I'll be fine on space.
I'm keeping Windows 11 around in case I need it for ... IDK taxes (though I don't have secureboot enabled because [points to image above]). A VM won't work for the Mint one, I need it separate for reasons I won't go into.
Btrfs was installed in default but I only know how to do full-disk encryption on ext4. Apparently btrfs doesn't have built-in support for it. I really liked how it was neatly organized into subvolumes but alas.
Replacement 1tb nvme drives can be quite cheap these days, 2tb ones aren't especially price prohibitive either.
Also a Malware on one system could infect the others.
The need for a larger vehicle might not arise from one week to the next, but the need for more gigabytes can. Windows 11 will happily eat up its entire partition next time it decides to update.
That said, as I type from my computer with only a 60 GB SSD, just make sure you have a plan for when that storage runs out.
This is less like buying a bigger car and more like upgrading the stereo in the car - 256GB in 2025 is somewhat akin to having only AM radio, and I've found it gets annoying real fast when doing anything serious.
I would hesitate to put anything smaller than 1 TB in something that's supposed to be a daily driver.
If it works, it works. Unless you're working in Espionage, anything is honestly fine as long as your main storage is encrypted. The boot loader exploits still can't unencrypt things, just allow access to the data, which...still can't be decrypted as as we know.
It's fine.
like this
osaerisxero likes this.
Well, good news then: lvm comes with most modern linux distros. In fact, it is an option you can enable when installing linux mint.
I use it on every system that I run (workstations and servers) and never had any issues.
It really just makes partition management way easyer:
With normal partitions you cannot grow any partition without moving all other partitions after it. LVM can do it without touching anything else.
The best case for semthing like this is when you buy bigger ssd. You can copy the data with dd and then grow any and partitions that you want without hassle.
At some point if they have ridiculous restrictions one might consider ... doing the test in person, in a room provided by the actual school or that THEY provide the hardware.
Anyway IMHO the bigger point is that a lot of my own inaction (I won't speak for others) came from fear of problems that rarely, if ever, materialized. I would recommend to move on and if the problem does actually arise then consider solutions at that point.
I uninstalled Windows on my SSD years ago (despite paying for it, forced by OEM deals), didn't regret it once. In fact, I wear it as a "badge of honor" with pride. When someone tells me I "have" to use Windows for whatever reason, I tell them I can't and that usually leads to interesting conversations.
Can’t speak to your exact machine but nowadays the license tends to be tied to the hardware.
If you are capable of manual partitioning then you should be able to reinstall Windows quickly if needed.
I guess I could reinstall Windows, I really hate the idea of running the Windows 11 installer though.
I do not need more space. I need 25GB per Linux system and 64GB for Windows (which I'm going to backup anyway), plus 20GB of data.
I may keep Windows 10 on my Desktop too. It's nowhere near as scary as Windows 11.
I'm not sure the refurbisher I got my laptop from even gave Windows a license key. It kept bugging me to create an account to fully activate it or something, I should boot into it to check but the thought of opening up Windows 11 just gives me the creeps.
EDIT: They did give me a license. It was just Windows being Windows.
I too think you should remove windows. But if you don't want to, take a clonezilla image of your hard drive now. Store it somewhere else of course. You then can always recover if this scheme gets weird.
Its the first thing I do when I get a new laptop. Then wipe windows. Then install Linux. If I have hardware issues I can simply restore windows for warranty.
In any case, I would pick one of those two Linux to be a primary. You don't want to get rid of mint or make it a VM. Ok third option: distrobox it.
You just got a new laptop and it has 250 GB of disk space?? Are you mad???
My Pendrive has 256 GB!
You also need it for Hibernation to be the same or larger size like your RAM. Without it you can only suspend.
You MUST use encrypted SWAP if you want to be really secure since otherwise your encryption key might be written onto your Nvme.
The common misconception that swap is pointless stems from misunderstanding what it's supposed to do. You shouldn't be triggering the OOM killer frequently anyway. In the much more normal case where you're only using some of your RAM for running applications, the rest is used as a filesystem cache/buffer. Having swap space available gives your OP the option to evict stale application memory from RAM rather than the filesystem cache when that would be the optimal choice to make.
This page explains it detail:
chrisdown.name/2018/01/02/in-d…
In defence of swap: common misconceptions
tl;dr: Having swap is a reasonably important part of a well functioning system. Without it, sane memory management becomes harder to achieve.chrisdown.name
Virtual Machine.
My laptop came with Windows 11, I nuked it and installed Linux before even booting lol.
that's a good question and I'm not sure. Worth it to find out, but personally I don't dual boot with Windows. I just have my main linux install and use a virtual machine. I never have needed to use a windows virtual machine but it would be interesting if I could activate it with the copy that came with my laptop.
Unless that copy is registered to my microsoft account? I have no idea that's how much I try to avoid windows now
The pain of keeping it around will outweigh the pain of needing it and not having it.
Quick boot into windows to help a friend test something on your machine?
- Twenty-five bajillion updates since you never logged in
- Windows "helpfully" cleaning up your Linux bootloader
- Any shared NTFS partition between windows and Linux is almost guaranteed to be left in a "dirty" state when windows shuts down, meaning you have to run ntfsfix before Linux will mount it again
And suddenly, that's where you'll be spending the whole afternoon. I agree with the others who say a VM is probably good enough.
Are you able to install a second SSD in your laptop? If you really need to keep it around, it's best practice to have Windows on its own physical drive.
Or if it's feasible, make your old laptop your dedicated Windows machine.
My old laptop doesn't have a TPM or Secureboot (or a working CTRL key). So that idea's out.
I'll try and put it on a VM, not sure whether that'll preserve my key though.
- You don't need multiple EFI system partitions! That's why Mint and OpenSUSE don't show up in each other's boot menu (or at least that's the first step, depending on your bootloader). The intention with the ESP is you put all EFI executables for dual-booting (and triple- and beyond) in there.
- Swap partition is fine anywhere. But as an aside, you can also just use a swapfile. Makes it easy to change the size dynamically. wiki.archlinux.org/title/Swap#…
- /dev/nvme0n1p6 I'd wonder why that's needed. /boot on /dev/nvme0n1p10 too, that's not strictly necessary.
None are game-breaking! You can just note these down for next time you have the itch to tinker.
Sorry for the late reply, I didn't have time this week to look into what a swapfile was and I delayed my response until I did. I will definitely be using a swap file since I do not ever use hibernation and encrypting my swap partition seems like a hassle.
I'm currently reinstalling things (after accidentally bricking the Windows partition and finding myself dissatisfied with openSUSE). Hopefully with just 4 partitions total (EFI, Kubuntu encrypted, Mint Xfce encrypted, data). I am removing the /boot from each because unless I'm leaving /boot unencrypted there's no reason to separate it out. Unfortunately encrypting /boot means GRUB doesn't detect it automatically in the Kubuntu installer so I'm still working out how to correct that.
Is there any reason? You're effectively wasting half the drive by using that space for OSes you almost never use.
If you ever happen to need Windows, which I don't see happening as you yourself can't imagine an actual use case, you can just go to the library or borrow a friend's computer or maybe use your phone.
As for Mint, do you just have it to experiment with? If you're just trying to try out other distros, a virtual machine or even live USBs are much easier ways to quickly try out new systems without having to clear actual partitions.
If you had much more storage then sure, waste some of it, but you're really gonna be missing that 120gb if you use your computer for... basically anything.
The order of the partitions basically doesn't matter at this point -- I think having a boot partition first used to be important for MBR schemes but I'm pretty sure in the UEFI era you can have them in whatever order. As others have mentioned, you could combine your EFI partitions, but doing so to an already installed system is slightly complex. You also could shrink some of your EFI and boot partitions, I'm not sure of the recommended sizes off the top of my head but I think they could be smaller. On the other hand, your swap partition should probably be bigger -- making it the same size as your RAM is a good rule of thumb and will enable hibernation (I think).
Yep, gonna clone and delete Windows 11.
Library might work.
I'm using Mint for sensitive matters, I want to keep it separate from my daily driver.
I'll basically just be using this laptop for web-browsing.
I don't really use hibernation. I'll need to enable swap encryption though.
Some of the responses I got were about how the swap partition is useless, and someone else replied to them that they were wrong. I haven't responded to these people because I don't yet understand who's right. I'll use a swap file or just no swap altogether once I check for myself if the anti-swap people are nutters. I assume temporary files aren't saved to swap but instead to temp so I can't imagine what it's used for on an SSD.
I found yet another thing I'd need to manually install with OpenSUSE Leap (and at that point I may aswell use Arch with all it's documentation glory). I didn't have any of these issues with Ubuntu-based distros so I'm doing a fresh install with Kubuntu.
I'm gonna LVM it with two distros and a shared data partition.
Yep, gonna clone and delete Windows 11.
Why would you clone it first? Just nuke it if you don't plan on using it. It has no value. You can always install it from scratch.
On a more serious note, as others have said, you'll probably burn through these weird storage limitations quickly.
Also, what do you mean by "sensitive matters" on Mint? Because almost any way you spin it, I feel like it's not a great idea:
- If you're talking professional, confidential work with clients, keeping it on the same device where you do anything personal sounds like a terrible idea, and it's probably worth it to shell out for a dedicated device just for this.
- If it's more personal things like government documents, medical records, and other things I'll neglect to name here, running a separate operating system just for those just feels like unnecessary paranoia and will cause you unnecessary trouble. If you're careful, it shouldn't be a problem - the major browsers prevent file access through protections against cross-site scripting.
Also, as I said in another comment here, please upgrade that drive before you put a lot of data on it. If you don't and you run out of storage later (a near-certainty on 256GB), you'll have to go through the effort of getting everything copied, which may include equipment purchases and several hours of your time when you could jut do it right now while your important files are still small enough to fit on a flash drive right now. Save yourself the future trouble.
Anyhow, I wish you happy Linux usage.
Again, so you don't plan on installing anything extra or downloading stuff off the web? Lol.
I tried running arch in about 115GB of space, it wasn't too bad but I had my /home directory on a separate drive. There's no way I could get away with my OS+Home Directories on something as laughably small as that, unless I was just testing for a few weeks.
(Yet another) help me choose a distro post
First of all, I'd like to apologize for contributing to the constant stream/flow of posts in which the main theme/idea/motive is to find a suitable distro for the OPoster. I wish we'd have a dedicated community that's active/large to the extent we'd be able to delegate/contain these convos to their designated places, but alas...
With that out of the way, we can get to the actual meat. So, for two weeks, I've been reading a ton about different distros. And while I'm still primarily overwhelmed by the amount of choice, I think I've finally got somewhat of an idea.
Requirements:
- Software-wise, the only thing I'm worried about is Davinci Resolve. It should work, but it seems to be hit or miss. The distro I wish to use should handle this gracefully.
- I'm a huge snob for security and privacy. As I'm kinda worried that desktop Linux' security isn't on par with M$ or macOS, I wish to use as secure of a system as possible to (somewhat) compensate for that.
I like to follow 'authorities' whenever I'm overwhelmed. As I've known them since their PrivacyTools-days, it was easy for me to designate Privacy Guides as such. Hence, I've come to appreciate its recommendations. But, I believe the tailor-made consensus by this communities' experts is at least equally important.
That's where I'm coming from, let's head over to the questions:
- Are PrivacyGuides' recommendations actually good in the first place?
- From what I can tell, the subset of security-focused distros are (at least potentially) my end-game. But, from what I could gather, they're not sensible picks for a newb. Is this correct?
- As for what remains, I got the following assumptions (please correct me if I'm wrong*):
- The anonymity-focused distros don't seem well-suited for general use.
- Hardening Arch or NixOS to the extent we find within the offerings of Fedora or openSUSE isn't trivial.
- Fedora's Atomic Desktops offer something tangibly superior security-wise over what we find for traditional Fedora and openSUSE at the expense of convenience.
As such, am I correct to assume that Fedora Atomic Desktops are best for me? Would you happen to know if it plays nicely with Davinci Resolve?- Are there any other distros worth mentioning within the context? If so, which ones and why?
- Any gotchas or otherwise I should be aware of?
Thanks in advance for your input!
Desktop/PC - Privacy Guides
Linux distributions are commonly recommended for privacy protection and software freedom.Privacy Guides
Uhmm..., I've heard it's hard 😅. Though, I will consider it if the following applies:
- Its difficulty is in the same ballpark as the security-focused distros on Privacy Guides' list
- It can trade blows with the security-focused distros with respect to security
Would you happen to know if the above applies?
Debian
I did not read the post, I just came here to say Debian since that's the answer to the general question. 😄
it is not a way to go if you want anything graphics card
Yeah, I don't think this will work nicely with Davinci Resolve. But we'll see.
immutable distros (e.g. fedora atomic desktops) are secure in the sense that they're containerized. if that's something you're after, i don't see why it wouldn't be a good fit for you.
they do rely on flatpaks, so you'll need to make sure davinci resolve comes as one. it doesn't seem to be on flathub, but i do see someone else has packaged it. if that runs well, i think you'd have nothing to worry about.
GitHub - pobthebuilder/resolve-flatpak: Flatpak packaging for Blackmagicdesign DaVinci Resolve
Flatpak packaging for Blackmagicdesign DaVinci Resolve - GitHub - pobthebuilder/resolve-flatpak: Flatpak packaging for Blackmagicdesign DaVinci ResolveGitHub
GitHub - zelikos/davincibox: Container for DaVinci Resolve installation and runtime dependencies on Linux
Container for DaVinci Resolve installation and runtime dependencies on Linux - zelikos/davinciboxGitHub
That looks pretty cool. Thank you so much for sharing that!
Would you happen to know how it compares to the flatpak (or something) that was shared by the other person?
Resolve is not available as a flatpak so distrobox would be your only option to get it running on a atomic distro.
But in general flatpaks are more secure than distrobox containers. Flatpaks are sandboxed. Apps can request access to different parts outside the sandbox through so called portals. Portals are basically like the permission system on your phone. But not all portals are finished yet so apps can get way more permissions in the name of user friendliness. There are third party tools like flatseal, that manage permissions though.
Distrobox on the other hand doesn't have any of that. Apps can access your entire home directory and a bunch of other stuff if they want
Interesting. How do you regard the following link? github.com/pobthebuilder/resol…
Oh wow, flatpaks are pretty cool. Thank you for that info! Are there any downsides to it? Or is it just straight up superior to all other options?
GitHub - pobthebuilder/resolve-flatpak: Flatpak packaging for Blackmagicdesign DaVinci Resolve
Flatpak packaging for Blackmagicdesign DaVinci Resolve - GitHub - pobthebuilder/resolve-flatpak: Flatpak packaging for Blackmagicdesign DaVinci ResolveGitHub
immutable distros (e.g. fedora atomic desktops) are secure in the sense that they’re containerized.
Hmm..., is it like properly sandboxed? That wasn't the impression I was getting. But I'm more than happy to be wrong on this.
Furthermore, how do they achieve this beyond Flatpak?
but i do see someone else has packaged it. if that runs well, i think you'd have nothing to worry about.
Oh, wow, that's pretty cool. Thank you for that find!
GitHub - pobthebuilder/resolve-flatpak: Flatpak packaging for Blackmagicdesign DaVinci Resolve
Flatpak packaging for Blackmagicdesign DaVinci Resolve - GitHub - pobthebuilder/resolve-flatpak: Flatpak packaging for Blackmagicdesign DaVinci ResolveGitHub
GitHub - pobthebuilder/resolve-flatpak: Flatpak packaging for Blackmagicdesign DaVinci Resolve
Flatpak packaging for Blackmagicdesign DaVinci Resolve - GitHub - pobthebuilder/resolve-flatpak: Flatpak packaging for Blackmagicdesign DaVinci ResolveGitHub
Firstly tell what ur GPU that u wanna use it for davinci resolve
An Amd GPU from 7 years ago
secondly tell what ur threat model
I haven't properly formalized my threat model yet. But assume that I want protection against any and all untargeted attacks.
tell what u want exactly to achieve
A general-use OS that I'd use to replace my Windows 10 installation. There's a ton of software that I use and for which I have to find replacements (eventually), but Davinci Resolve is probably my biggest worry.
Thank you. Could you perhaps substantiate it beyond an endorsement? Like, for a newb, I don't see how it would be better than openSUSE beyond prioritizing the following:
- "Leading edge" (Fedora) vs rolling release (Tumbleweed) OR 'stable' (Leap)
- IBM (Fedora) vs SUSE (openSUSE) - (We might even choose to reframe this as US vs Germany/EU)
Like, for an outsider, the Fedora endorsement mostly just confirms that Fedora is the more popular option. But that doesn't have to be on merit. If it is on merit, would you so kind to point this out? Especially security-wise*
Fedora is the "new" Ubuntu after Canonical made some bad calls about Ubuntu as a distro. It has little if any weird customizations, and gives you the stock experience of Gnome or KDE.
I don't have any serious issues with Suse I guess(?), but the community is lacking, and the frequency of issues with updates and packages is way more than Fedora.
So, if I understood you correctly, openSUSE does have weird customizations and does not give a stock experience. Right?
but the community is lacking, and the frequency of issues with updates and packages is way more than Fedora.
Interesting. The first part was something I was expecting, but the latter part actually surprised me.
I suppose that, if it came down to Fedora vs openSUSE, I'd just have to give it Fedora then.
Anyhow, any thoughts on non-atomic Fedora vs atomic Fedora?
So what is the purpose of immutable distros?
Furthermore, my introductory reading would suggest some benefits:
- The read-only base system as well as the containerization might prove beneficial for stability.
- Furthermore, I would think that the read-only base system also contributes for eliminating some attack vectors.
And, with GrapheneOS' endorsement of secureblue, I find it hard to believe that it doesn't provide any benefits. But please feel free to enlighten me on this.
Though usability is probably a very legit concern, though. So perhaps not the brightest of ideas to start with as a first distro, but we'll see.
The entire functional premise of immutable distro builds was for mobile and edge devices. It makes flashing/updating dead simple, and it's easier to revert to a known good revision if something goes wrong.
There is no "stability" benefit, because the running system is unchanged, only the filesystem operates differently. I'm not sure where you read that. Also, containers aren't inherently more stable than anything, so that's extra confusing if you read that somewhere.
The filesystem being read-only doesn't help reduce your attack surface at all? If you're vulnerable to a zero-day on any running service on stock distros, you'd be vulnerable on immutable as well.
Distro's are not like picking between windows or mac, Nearly all linux distributions are based on the same linux kernel and many of the base GNU packages. The main differences between distributions are philosophical.
Some distro's will focus on free as in speech over free as in beer meaning if something has closed source, or proprietary code they may or may not include it. You can still download and install proprietary software and drivers regardless of this initial choice.
Some distro's will have a preferred package manager which is like their software or app store, but if you dont like the one they picked you can install a different one.
As for security, linux is as secure as you make it, its vastly more secure than Windows out of the box, and probably more secure than MacOS but we dont really know because both Apple and Microsoft dont publish their code so we cant review or audit its security. Setting up a secure linux install is dead simple and you can find dozens of guides for every distribution and edge case.
Since the main tool you want to run is Davinci Resolve it makes sense to see what distribution they test against and go with that, rather than pick an arbitrary "secure" distribution. It will be simpler to harden their preferred distro than to take a hardened distro and make their software work on it.
I suggest checking their website and going with their top suggestion.
Thank you for your comment! It contains many gems to benefit from*
It will be simpler to harden their preferred distro than to take a hardened distro and make their software work on it.
This is what I found to be particularly curious. So, would you say that the (extra) security/hardening provided by the likes of Qubes OS and secureblue is trivial to apply elsewhere? If so, would you be so kind to give me some pointers? I did try to find it myself but failed. Perhaps I'm not using the correct search terms OR perhaps I don't even know where to look.
I suggest checking their website and going with their top suggestion.
Excellent. Why didn't I think of this before 😜 . Uhmm..., based on their instructions, I believe installing the Rocky Linux 8.6 image that they provide is the safe bet. Right?
Finally, I'm left with two questions:
- What does Rocky Linux' absence from Privacy Guides list suggest? Would you happen to know how it's (perhaps supposedly) tangibly worse than their picks?
Oh wow. Thank you so much for that information! Much appreciated!
Hmm..., so I suppose both Rocky Linux and Alma Linux are out of consideration then. Which is definitely a pity considering Davinci Resolve. What would you suggest instead?
None of the popular distros will spy on you the way Windows or MacOS do, so privacy shouldn't be a concern.
As for security, is it malware you fear? Without more specific context, the only thing that can be said for sure is that you should encrypt your drive (most distros will have the option to set that up during installation), and don't sudo random commands you see on the internet without understanding what they do.
I believe I heard that there was some scandal involving Ubuntu, but perhaps I'm wrong. Please feel free to correct me. Are there any (other) distros that I should be weary of for privacy-sake?
For security, I want to be well-protected against any and all untargeted attacks. So protection against malware is included.
Thank you for the general notes/recommendations/advice about safe practices on Linux! Regarding sudo (and the terminal in general), I've just accepted that it will be part of my workflow going forward, even if the amount of times I had used it on Windows can probably be counted on one hand. Regardless, beyond not sudoing random commands, are there like rigid guidelines (or something) one should adhere to for safe/secure computing?
The Ubuntu thing was about them making it opt-out rather than opt-in (so turned on by default), but it's still nothing malicious and diesn't collect any personal data. At least that's how I remember it.
Also Linux doesn't really have anti-viruses like Windows does (there are a few options for edgecases though). That is because Linux isn't really targeted by malware developers as much and also Linux is actually designed to be secure.
As for general security tips, number 1 is probably using a password manager (I use a KeePassXC compatible client).
Also be careful with rm -rf. I almost deleted all the files in my home directory once. I have aliased rm to gio trash since.
Tired of Google Home not working? This new change will make you furious
Tired of Google Home not working? This new change will make you furious - Android Authority
Google recently added a tiny change to voices available to a small set of users currently testing Gemini-powered Assistant on Nest speakers.Tushar Mehta (Android Authority)
Report: Intel struggles with new 18A process as it cuts workers and cancels projects
cross-posted from: piefed.social/post/1117434
Intel says it’s still on track to launch its first 18A Core Ultra chips in 2025.
HHS Winds Down mRNA Vaccine Development Under BARDA
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) today announced the beginning of a coordinated wind-down of its mRNA vaccine development activities under the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), including the cancellation and de-scoping of various contracts and solicitations. The decision follows a comprehensive review of mRNA-related investments initiated during the COVID-19 public health emergency.
“We reviewed the science, listened to the experts, and acted,” said HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. “BARDA is terminating 22 mRNA vaccine development investments because the data show these vaccines fail to protect effectively against upper respiratory infections like COVID and flu. We’re shifting that funding toward safer, broader vaccine platforms that remain effective even as viruses mutate.”
https://www.hhs.gov/press-room/hhs-winds-down-mrna-development-under-barda.html
adhocfungus likes this.
Big tech legal action
Rakudo Weekly News: 2025.31 Snappy Turtles
2025.31 Snappy Turtles
Anton’s Corner Anton Antonov has provided us with two more lovely posts this week. As ever his visuals and movies are a stunning insight into our world made with Raku. The snappily named Turt…Rakudo Weekly News
appropriateghost
in reply to geneva_convenience • • •geneva_convenience likes this.
geneva_convenience
in reply to appropriateghost • • •AMNY
The picture has since been changed but Google's image cache shows that they did use this. https://x.com/SabbySabs2/status/1950028731596034149