Disable all other twitch add block extensions and use vaft or vid swap new on this page. Make sure to follow the instructions and set the proper filter. Sometimes mine breaks and I just re-do the instalation steps and restart my browser and it usually works again.
Hey just a heads up, the permissions you needed weren’t “7”, but “+x”. +x is execute permissions. “+x” is a user or groups ability to execute the file or (browse the) directory. The number is an expression of some user or groups ability to read, write and execute all in one convient character. It’s calculated by adding together the numerical values of read, write and execute permissions when read is 4, write is 2 and execute is 1.
So with all of them enabled you’d add up all three numbers and come up with 7, full permissions. R+x is 5 and r+w is 6 etc. there are eight different possibilities.
The reason it’s done that way is from long ago, before acls, when data about files had to be stored in simple ways on tiny file systems. The permissions for a file were half a byte, and stored not as “0-7” but as three bits. If the first one was a “1” you could read, if the second one was the same you could write and so on.
e: the whole point of saying this post was that knowing all i just wrote, a person can decypher old and new discussions on their problems that use language like “the execute bit” or “set the read bit”.
I appreciate this. I had a hard time coming up with the proper wording. If a value decreases one year by 5% then decreases 7% the following year, is that not an increase in the value’s decline?
Depends. I almost always buy clothes and shoes in actual stores, as shopping for them online is a wasteful hassle. There are also some shops that I enjoy visiting, like second-hand stores or Asian supermarkets, where it’s interesting to just browse and buy interesting things I wasn’t specifically looking for.
On the other hand, I always buy stuff like electronics online. Electronics stores are more expensive and have a way smaller selection, so I don’t bother with them. Generally if I’m looking for something specific, buying it online is just more convenient.
I can definitely appreciate buying clothes in store lemmy.ml/post/17369601 What I neglected to include in this account was the incredible staff at the store who went above and beyond to help me find proper sizing when they knew I wasn’t even making a purchase then and there.
On the other hand, I did buy sneakers in a store but there wasn’t anyone to help me find the right pair. It seems like many corporations aren’t willing to pay people to work in stores as much these days. Instead, they can just offer free shipping and free returns for less money than paying someone a living wage.
I can not tell you how many times I wish Radio Shack were still around. I’d gladly pay more money to solve a problem now than have to wait for something to ship over from China.
I used to work in a car stereo and home theater shop. I can tell you that online reviews, even YouTube videos done by “experts”, are no where close to an in-person experience. It’s sad and incredibly frustrating. I just bought another set of highly regarded headphones which I found to be severely overpriced and under performing. I’ve been around high end audio for over twenty five years - I actually know what I’m listening for.
I think the point you raise is that people who care about the things they’re buying would generally prefer to buy that thing in person. Others who may not care as much or not be as knowledgable are content buying whatever the internet tells them to buy - regardless if it’s proper for them to make that specific purchase. I have to wonder how many unsatisfied customers there are out there who either throw things away or have to keep buying replacements.
Bcachefs, and bcachefs on root. Need something with filesystem level encryption instead of LUKS, and *ubuntu’s and derivatives have all abandoned ZFS on root installs now.
Bcachefs is a copy-on-write (COW) file system for Linux-based operating systems.[3] Features include caching,[4] full file-system encryption using the ChaCha20 and Poly1305 algorithms,[5] native compression[4] via LZ4, gzip[6] and Zstandard,[7] snapshots,[4] CRC-32C and 64-bit checksumming.[3] It can span block devices, including in RAID configurations.[5]
I see it has an audit back in 2017, but I’ve yet to find anything newer. The finding was good, but suggested further audit be done.
The tiered storage stuff is pretty cool. You can say "I want this data on this disk, so if I get a cache miss from a faster disk/RAM it'll come from this other disk first."
I believe it also has some interesting ways of handling redundancy like erasure coding, and I thiiiink it does some kind of byte-level deduplication? I don't know if that's implemented or is even still planned, but I remember being quite excited for it. It was supposed to be dedupe without all of the hideous drawbacks that things like ZFS dedupe have.
EDIT: deduplication is absolutely not a thing yet. I don't know if it's still on the roadmap.
It’s mainly supposed to be simpler and by extension faster than btrfs (which is kinda proven by the fact that fewer devs made this thing work in less time when compared to btrfs). It happens to enable some extra features that way too.
However, while btrfs annecdotally had many issues, it’s used by big players like SUSE and even bigger ones like Facebook these days. bcachefs on the other hand is nowhere near as battle tested, so I’ll stay away from it for a little longer.
Anything beyond setting up a network-wide dns blocker on docker, so… crowdsec, fail2ban, some proxy-related stuff, zero trust tunnelers and so on.
Why? Because its overkill to my current setup and I don’t see myself using em for real other than for learning purposes, and thats it.
And before someone asks “Do you protect your server at all?”. Other than making some “hacky” stuff with my internet so all ports appear as closed whilst they actually aren’t? Eh, not really. Still, my server is about to reach a year of running nonstop 24/7 and it has never been hacked a single time since then, so naaaw.
How do you tell whether it’s been hacked? The hallmark of a good hack is invisibility, like modifying logs. Do you perhaps count SSH sessions in your router and verify it against client logs, or somesuch technique?
“more diversity” includes people whose entire lives are politicized, so you have to pick between “more diversity” and “less politics”, you cannot have both
Downvotes show that people here don’t know that even in 9th century a large part of the ME’s population was Christian dhimmis. Coptic, Assyrian, Armenian, Nestorian. “Dhimmi” means they couldn’t bear arms and had to pay “protection tax”, and also a “Muslim robbing a dhimmi” situation was usually resolved in favor of the Muslim.
Which is vastly different from being murdered and having their civilizations destroyed, like for instance the Crusaders did.
The Crusaders also did not stop from slaughtering orthodox Christians either.
When looking at the details, Persian, Arab and Mauretanian rules over people of other religions were much more tolerant and civilized than comparable European ruling situations. I guess the saddest example of these are the Spanish Jews, who flourished under the “Moors” and got genocided and ethnically cleansed by the Catholics, after they were no longer dhimmis under Muslim rule.
Which is vastly different from being murdered and having their civilizations destroyed, like for instance the Crusaders did.
The Crusaders didn’t do a fraction of what Muslims did during their actual initial conquest.
When looking at the details, Persian, Arab and Mauretanian rules over people of other religions were much more tolerant and civilized than comparable European ruling situations. I guess the saddest example of these are the Spanish Jews, who flourished under the “Moors” and got genocided and ethnically cleansed by the Catholics, after they were no longer dhimmis under Muslim rule.
I think you should go and learn the meaning of the word “firman” in the Middle-East.
Anyway - I may agree about late Muslim rule in Spain specifically and some periods of Arab rule in Armenia, Mesopotamia and Egypt.
In Iran Zoroastrians were to be exterminated, they wouldn’t get that sweet dhimmi status. Which may be one of the reasons it became largely Christian after the conquest and then largely Shia.
I know what I’m talking about, but I get furious over Westerners trying to find indulgence for their own ancestors’ actions at the expense of Middle-Eastern native Christians, and I see saying that Crusaders were somehow worse than any Muslim conquest as part of that.
Being furious I may sometimes say something imprecise.
Doesn’t negate the fact that Islam is not native to any place outside of the Arabian peninsula, and those areas it has invaded still have native populations and religions not yet completely exterminated, and those are largely Christian. Saying that Crusaders were the baddies, but the Muslims whom they were fighting were not, is disgusting in that context. It’s like that “Irish were like slaves too”, putting things into American context so that you’d understand better.
Same as that myth of Salah ad-Din being benevolent and honorable, mostly started by German Empire’s propaganda as part of their relations with genocidal Ottoman Empire.
I hope you’re just really misinformed and not just really racist but you should take a quick stroll to your local library, buy a few history books and look around.
Christianity has been far more brutal and repressive for a lot longer than pretty much every other religion out there.
Which doesn’t change anything in the conversation that started about “the Islamic world” being built on the conquest of more civilized peoples, which were mostly Christian.
Also I’m fine with reducing Christians to “middle-eastern Christians” here. Others don’t seem really Christian from there anyway. For these reasons as well:
King Leopold murdered ten million Congolese. The British empire 100 million Indians. The dutch started the slave trade.
Only I think the Portuguese started the slave trade. Not that it changes anything.
because they murdered and destroyed the very civilization that created said knowledge
What are you talking about?
Are you blaming the collapse of the Roman Empire and the ensuing Dark Ages on Muslims? (A religion that didn’t even exist yet at the start of the Dark Ages.)
Am I always tired and exhausted from my full time job? If so the weekend shift had to be like walk in a park - happy people, good colleagues, good pay, no bullshit. If it’s another exhausting job, then hell no. Maybe for a short period of time to get extra cash if that’s really needed.
Is my full time job really easy on nerves and I’m coming home relaxed and in good mood all the time? Why not keep in touch with medical field to stay relevant there?
Edit: also depends on other factors, like family, children, etc. Having a child, you’d have to be really desperate to get another job instead of taking care of the kid.
Maybe to personal but what companies did you work for? Because there are markets for employee clothing and depending on what or who it is they can earn you big bucks.
I’m mostly worried about the Harbor Freight shirts, cause there’s one down the street from the clothing bin I usually drop stuff in. The construction contractors not so much cause outside of construction sites, no one really says anything about em
If it’s just HF and you didn’t sign any paperwork on the matter when you worked there, it’s probably fine. If you signed paperwork, consult an attorney yadda yadda yadda.
It’d be one thing if you worked in an industry where those uniforms might give you actual access somewhere (police, fire, EMS, etc), but this is not that.
As the population declines we would probably reach a point where we have to go back to agrarian societies and those pretty much need a bunch of child workers working the farm with the parents.
My thought would be no, we won’t disappear unless it’s a cataclysmic event that just wipes us all out at once. Also if we can get off this rock and establish a base somewhere else like the moon or mars that increases our chances of not being extinguished even higher.
Because if the fertility rate stays the same there will become a point where societies will become too small and disconnected to maintain technology. At that point people will probably have to fall back on farming in order to survive. When that happens you’ll have to maintain large families in order to keep everyone fed.
It’s not like our birth rates are falling due to some outside cause like disease. It’s because modern societies don’t require many children in each family. Give that reason to have large families back and the birth rates will explode.
It won’t though, as there become fewer humans it’s likely it will become easier to have more children again (fewer people for the same amount of finite resources) and the rate will increase.
You’re thinking about the resources wrong. I mostly mean land availability.
Even in first world countries the birth rates are higher outside cities than inside. In undeveloped counties the birthdates are lower in crowded cities.
Huh, I guess that will mean that humans will perpetually be moving to “the big city” from the countryside. I guess romcoms won’t ever have to change their story line.
Blaming this on “laziness” is a really naive and unfair take on why rich nations have less kids. The more likely reasons, and more commonly accepted reasons are:
I like how we phrase this as “better education” and “better career opportunities for women”. While technically true relative to poor countries, these explain nothing about why fertility rates are so low. They are related, but framing them differently will help us understand.
Why do people have fewer kids? Because economic life in most developed countries is relatively unstable, and to ensure economic stability, we require people to develop years of education and work experience to receive a comfortable salary. In many places we now require two such incomes. This mean women really don’t have a choice but to pursue advanced education and work, whether they want to or not. And we are not willing to accommodate children during education or work. This means women (and increasingly men too) are severely penalized economically for having children, and so of course people will have far fewer on average.
Another likely factor is the atomized nature of the modern family. Many people need to move to distant places for work, severing their direct ties to family and community. Human mothers aren’t well equipped to raise children solo, and even two parents is a stretch if you have 2+ kids. In past times we always relied on neighbors and extended family to help keep an eye on the youngsters and to teach parents the skills they need to do it right.
If you look at the very wealthy, there is some evidence that they have higher fertility, though I couldn’t find good data on this so take it with a grain of salt. But they have access to enough money to buy personalized childcare, which solves almost all of the above issues.
In developing countries, children often mean free labor and form the basis of your retirement through elder care, so while the economic conditions are of course worse overall, the opposite incentives exist. Another factor is that poor, agricultural societies are almost always extremely patriarchal, which tends to lead to high (involuntary) fertility.
In my view, egalitarian economic reforms will help bring fertility rates in all countries towards a healthy moderate level.
Yea I completely agree with everything you said. Life in rich countries doesn’t mean that everyone is rich and lazy and fat. I mean just look at the US. So many people live in poverty and literally cannot afford kids.
The retirement plan goes for rich countries too. But different. With elder care going the way it’s going, you’d be happy to get someone to help you shower once per month. Children can help you with a lot once you’re old and fragile.
True! This might be part of why we see poorer families having more kids, in addition to the fact that lower educational attainment expectations make it easier to get pregnant younger.
For more middle and upper-class families you typically send them to a retirement home so it’s not something people are as worried about.
In poorer countries, the investment into each child is minimal. By the time they were 8 or 9 years old they were expected to contribute to the family. Higher child mortality rates also plays into this, as most families lose a few kids to disease etc. Children are seen as a commodity that they control to make the parents/grandparents lives better.
In industrialized societies the amount of resources dedicated to each child is more than the the resources dedicated to 5 or 6 families in poorer countries. Children are dependent on their parents well into adulthood. As the cost to raise the kids increase the average family size decreases because of limited resources.
You are contradicting yourself. By moving into a wealthy country you neither gain education nor wealth. Its about culture and environment.
My guess is: in wealthy countries people are living more isolated. Without help from friends and family you have to invest a huge amount oft time into rising a child, which many can’t afford.
By moving to a wealthy country, you do gain education and wealth, wtf are you talking about.
People don’t move to a country to stay poor and uneducated. They immediately send their kids to school and they immediately benefit from better employment.
There’s been enough studies about it. Birthrate is absolutely linked to wealth. It’s universal.
kbin.life
Oldest