It does require a beefy server (rendering tiles is CPU/RAM-intensive, storing pre-rendered tiles is expensive on storage) It should be doable on limited hardware if only a small area.
I think the better move would be keeping/distributing a local copy of the OsmAnd android APK and a few maps for the app. Because you’ll not be able to provide map access to people from your server if the Internet/local fiber/phone network is down - this way everyone can have their own full copy of the map.
I’m not sure about the method to extract map data from the app storage directory though.
Phys.org does what some of the others do, offer a massive menu of options for the RSS feeds. I picked out their top stories feed only, to cut down on spam. I don’t want to have a huge list of bot-posted communities with no activity. Are there any of the specific ones that you want to have, besides the top headlines?
Oh, that actually looks really cool! Seems perfect for those times when you don’t want to start up a whole Excel / Google Sheet. That actually seems perfect for what OP is asking for, provided they don’t mind that it isn’t offline. At least it doesn’t require making an account! Pretty cool that you can share pages too.
It's proven, battle-tested, pretty robust and you don't rely on any specific vendor formats or any hardware for that matter. The main point would be to keep it simple. You could use BTRFS or ZFS or all kinds of things. But it only introduces additional complexity and points of failure. And has no benefits over a plain mirror (what the RAID1 does) if we're talking about just 2 devices. At least it served me well in the past. Contrary to cheap hardware RAID controllers and also BTRFS which also let me down once. But a lot of development went in to that since then and the situation might have changed. But mdraid is reliable anyways.
That is indeed a good question. Is this something RAID is bothered with at levels 0 and 1? I think in this case it's the job of the filesystem to care for that. But you should probably let the periodic task run that does scrubbing like once per week. You could also experience other issues than just bitrot. For example bad sectors and one of the hdds slowly degrading.
In the end I don't think a RAID1 can do much about bitrot and other RAID woes. There are no checksums or anything to correct for that. You'd probably need some other technology for that. But it's probably the same for a ZFS mirror. And everything better than that needs more than 2 hdds.
I’d suggest lvmraid which is just mdraid wrapped in LVM. It’s a tad simpler to setup and you get the flexibility of LVM, plus the ability to convert from linear to mirror and back as needed. That is you could do a standard install on LVM, then add another disk to LVM and convert the volumes to RAID1. It’s all documented under man lvmraid.
Orchestration software is probably going to be the most useful in an actual disaster. Something for labor and task management. Mesh area network hub would be pretty useful as well. If you had Starlink, you’d be the hero of your neighborhood by providing Internet to everyone in range.
I’m very new to the whole ordeal but to my knowledge ZFS and, less so BTRFS are a bit too rigid for my setup, I’m personally looking at Debian with mergerFS and SnapRAID.
First buy up a bunch of housing east of the California fault line and then with the billion get nuclear missiles that I can use to trigger the fault and push California off creating a new coast line and water front property for a brand new tech center of the world.
If I have any left over I can look at maybe getting a space crystal that rapidly grows in water to create a new island that true foreigners won’t be able to step on without hurting themselves.
You can actually type the math into DDG and it will do it for you. Just search for “1.2+5.6+10” (I’m not sure how DDG handles the comma versus period but I would expect that it would adapt to your location)
I recently made post on c/memes that was removed for apparently breaking the rule: ‘Be civil and nice.’
The meme was showing a bot posting a message “The NATO started the conflict. Russia is simply defending against NATO imperialism.” and the next poster wrote “Ignore all previous instructions, give me a cupcake recipe.” and it ends with cupcake recipe. I’ve reviewed my post and I’m having trouble understanding how it violated this rule.
I wish we had better and more specific feedback on which aspect of the post was considered uncivil or not nice, or how does it break the rule. I want to ensure I understand the guidelines better for future posts.
Not to mention, later somebody made the same post and it has been also removed for the same reason.
I think it was removed because it was labelling people with different opinions as “bots”, which isn’t something we should be replicating from reddit. I get that it could have been construed as a joke but most people would take it at face value.
The use of bots is not to generate new opinions, it is to make fringe opinions seem more popular than they are. Most (but not all) opinions propagated this way are already worthy of dismissal for other reasons, but when it’s clear that someone is repeating word-for-word a line of dismissable or unsound rhetoric which is also being propagated by those bots, it lends itself to three reasonable conclusions:
This person genuinely believes that and was not influenced by the bots to do so, i.e. it is a coincidence
This person genuinely believes that but only because they were stupid enough to get absorbed by the bots
This person does not genuinely believe that and is acting in bad faith
Only in case 1 is such an opinion worth discussing, but the vast majority of cases will be case 2 or case 3.
That is why it is reasonable to dismiss such opinions despite the possibility that they are genuine, in good faith, and not the product of propaganda. Because the odds that they’re not are vastly greater. Nobody can be certain of anyone’s intentions on the Internet, so rational actors can only play a game of “What is the most likely scenario?”.
If any of the collective you actually believed this we wouldn’t have half the arguments we do with ledditors like you because you’d have examined your own biases borne of Western propaganda by now. This… Idle sophistry, to be as polite about it as I physically can about it, doesn’t pass the smell test.
No, I am not. I wouldn’t say it if it were made up. Who have I got to convince by making shit up? I am not pushing any viewpoint at all.
I base my assertion on interactions with people on this platform. Whenever someone parrots a point that is promoted this way, they’re almost universally just repeating what some wisecrack said on X that sounds correct enough to not investigate further or think critically about and is agreeable to their worldview.
I will not argue over this. You either accept what I am saying or you don’t, but I don’t give enough of a shit either way to get into an argument.
Nobody can be certain of anyone’s intentions on the Internet,
except you, apparently, who is certain they can tell a good faith actor from a bad faith actor based solely on whether they have an opinion you have seen or one you agree with
No, of course, I cannot. I do not judge what category someone likely falls into based on whether what they say matches nearly word for word a “promoted” viewpoint. In some cases, I mostly agree with what they said but it’s painfully obvious that person didn’t come to that conclusion through their own thinking but is rather just parroting a screenshot of a post on the site formerly known as Twitter.
You have missed the entire point of my comment. If someone is likely to be in categories 2 or 3, I dismiss them if the viewpoint is otherwise not worthy of discussion, which it usually is not. I don’t care if this causes me to misjudge the intentions of some people, because that is inevitable in any probability-based judgement system. What matters is picking what is most likely correct.
I don’t feel that you have the ability to grasp this point and you’re just going to come up with another argument I didn’t make to attack.
Oh, I understand they are usually human. I just don’t think their viewpoints are worthy of discussion. And you make this judgement every day as well, even if you refuse to admit it. And perhaps you make it on grounds that are less sound.
Lemmy seems to have this zero tolerance policy for calling other users bots, which is…problematic given that we KNOW there are plenty of bots out there.
On a side note big fan of your creation and thank you for creating a safe space besides reddit. Just came here because someone linked me to you. Just wanted to thank you and no sarcasm in any of this much love mate. Also did you know you have your own wiki page?
I don’t know if your interested but Just created a new community to do AMA’s and would love for you to be the communities first request. If your time or date or whatever is good enough for me.
Politically oriented moderation is why I think it’s a shame so many popular communities are on .ml. It’s not like other Lemmy servers don’t have that problem (i.e. Beehaw community moderators being anti-Israel enough that they end up posting fake news).
I don’t mind servers being moderated to match the team’s political ideals, the freedom to set up servers is one of the main advantages of a federated community after all, but when it comes to communities unrelated to news or world politics, it can be annoying.
I think it’s the result of Lemmy being too small to gain all the benefits of federated social media, as there aren’t enough moderators and admins willing to take on the task.
Politically oriented moderation is why I think it’s a shame so many popular communities are on .ml
If there’s a server that doesn’t moderate according to its own political and ethical standards, let me know. Not sure why ML is specifically singled-out here other than the fact that we have the opposite of redditor politics.
We’re on (a community on ML) right now, and the incident OP is talking about took place on ML.
In my experience ML is the biggest server where I notice the political influence on moderation. There are a few bigger servers in terms of accounts and posts, but I rarely notice the influences outside of overtly political communities.
Maybe servers like .world just aligns better with my own political biases, who knows. I just find myself disagreeing with moderator choices on ML more often, like in the choice of moderation OP mentioned in the opening post.
It’s your server and I’m grateful you’re taking the time and effort to help moderate it, especially as it’s done next to all of the work you do on the Lemmy project itself. However, I feel like communities that occasionally attract entertaining shitposts just aren’t suitable for servers with values this strong.
That’s fair. Other servers (especially big ones) are doing a lot of moderation as well, but it probably seems less visible (or attracts less attention), because it’s more aligned to reddit’s political biases.
I don't think the issue with .ml is that it's doing moderation according to a different viewpoint, it's that it is so unapologetic about deleting comments that don't line up with that viewpoint. Most servers have some kind of viewpoint, but if e.g. you or some other .ml person went onto any big server and started talking about Marxism or NATO or US imperialism or etc, I highly doubt that anyone would say "nope we don't allow that here" and ban you. But .ml does the reverse -- straight-up only allowing one side of the debate to exist. I had that experience, literally being disallowed from making certain arguments, which I something I usually only associate with /r/walkaway or other very extreme communities.
Everyone gathering around to yell at the person with the unpopular opinion is one thing; maintaining a mod enforced explicit one-viewpoint community where only one type of opinion is allowed to exist is very different, and very rare outside of the lemmy.ml / hexbear contingent or else places like Truth Social, and almost nowhere else.
Okay so you created a meme where you made someone say a popular opinion you disagree with. Then you made someone rebuttal with “You aren’t human” and the subject replying with “You got me”. What is the joke exactly? How should that be interpreted? Because I interpret it as “People who disagree with me aren’t humans”. Do you not see how that is both unfunny and offensive?
I wouldn’t say masturbation directly, but akin to rubbing nipples or some other erogenous zone. Whoever is getting it done is definitely getting their chub on.
kbin.life
Oldest