If there’s something really important on that disk, don’t do ANYTHING, just unplug it and hand it over to a data recovery company.
If there isn’t anything really important on there, go ahead and try and do it yourself.
Paying $100 to a data recovery company can save you a ton of headaches if it has the only copy of your thesis on there and you mess it up trying to fix things yourself.
If you create an image of the disk in the current state from a live boot or an other machine. You can try fixing it without having to risk making things worse
Where is data recovery $100? In my country, data recovery is like $1000 USD to look at your drive, and then they tell you how much they can recover and a full quote.
Depends on what they actually need to do. When it’s a drive that’s working and they just have to image it and run some recovery software it should be pretty cheap.
Clean room repair of dead hard disks is a different story.
i own four xx20 series thinkpads. One of which has debian with i3wm, the other three dont have anything installed atm. Sue me ik.
xx20 series is the best tbh. The only thing maybe arguably better is x80 series, due to the more modern processors and actual features over the xx20 series. xx40
my w520 with an i7 2720qm or whatever the fuck is it is is genuinely better than any intel mobile cpu that isn’t quad core. AND it’s socketed.
looking for a cheap xx40s (or p it’s whichever one is better i cant remember) just for the completion, as well as an xx80 just to have one with more modern hardware, but my xx20 is everything i’ll need in a laptop tbh. I would also like to get an x220 at some point.
naming legend for anybody wondering.
x - model type, w, t, x, etc
x - the device type, 4, 5, 2, etc usually screen size related
n - device model? Release related.
n - 0, just the number zero, anything that isn’t a zero is e waste im pretty sure.
i’ve heard, but honestly, is there anything interesting about them other than the like 2% performance uplift? And the fact that batteries are only semi-compatible between them. I suppose they might be more power efficient? I have no clue, if you have any knowledge it would be appreciated.
My w520 with 4 cores still smokes anything that isn’t like 9th gen mobile in terms of multi core. Thanks intel very cool.
Erwin and Attenborough didn’t believe either of those things.
Attenborough is a massive hypocrit who wants the poors to go plant based but refuses to, and also thinks the world is overpopulated but wont use fewer resources.
Erwin’s job was literally harassing animals for entertainment until one finally got the better of him.
I don’t know much about him, but poking around a bit shows him saying vegetarian or reduced meat consumption. He eats cheese and fish. Sounds like he’s doing exactly like what he’s recommending to others.
Attenborough is a pescatarian, and Irwin was specifically rescuing animals and transporting them to places that were more natural, and less human infested.
I haven’t heard anything about David Attenborough talking about plant based stuff so I won’t dispute it but he did help found and fund the zoology museum in my town, one that specifically tries to educate people on the dangers of climate change and making species endangered. From what I’ve seen of his filming they’re pretty conscious about not leaving any waste behind too.
“We must change our diet. The true tragedy of our time is still unfolding – the loss of biodiversity,” Sir David says in the film. “Half of fertile land on Earth is now farmland, 70 percent of birds are domestic, majority chickens. There’s little left for the world. We have completely destroyed it.
and yet
“I do eat cheese, I have to say, and I eat fish. But by and large I’ve become much more vegetarian over the past few years than I thought I would ever be.”
Sure he helps fund some decent shit. He’s rich, knighted, connected to aristocracy. He’s also a spineless twerp.
Do you drive a car? How about ride the bus? Use electricity?
Spineless twerp!!
Yeah, just because he admits to not being your idea of perfect, eating cheese and fish, doesn’t mean he isn’t trying. I see that comment about eating cheese and fish to mean he’s not eating steak every night, like others.
Yeah sure. Skipping the Camembert and buying a plant based really fermented one instead is just too hard for a multi millionaire. What an unrealistic standard! He only thinks the apocalypse is nigh.
I mean that’s like equivalent to like walking the 60 km commute you have to do. Be realistic, it’s not like you manage to be plant based on a budget that’s below median for your city or something. It’s not like you give up cheese entirely because you can’t afford the vegan replacements but recognise the cruelty of animal ag. What’s a millionaire famous guy to do?
he’s still a hipocrite… like yes it’s good that he advocates, it would be better if he followed through and used some of his staggering, mind meltingly large wealth to actually do something.
Instead he pays lip service while using an enormous amount of resources and being shitty. Is lip service better than no service? yes. Is it good enough for one of the most privileged individuals on the planet? no.
If even a billion people lived like him we’d destroy the world in a week.
Everyone is a bit of a hypocrite. Even you. It’s important to know when someone is being hypocritical but has a point and when they’re just being hypocritical. I think this is pretty clearly the former.
He’s also only a hypocrite if you believe the only possible outcomes are perfect success, and complete failure. He, by all accounts, seems to live by what he preaches. Not perfectly, but again, that only matters if the only marker for success for you is perfection, in which case no one will meet it.
He’s a multi millionaire who admits to still eating red meat despite having the funds to hire a professional chef to make delicious plant based meals every meal. He also admits to eating chickens while decrying it.
Fuck me for holding people with more power to higher standards I guess.
He’s also intensely classist and has deeply problematic views about overpopulation. Doing the very British thing of talking about too many African people while completely ignoring the massively asymmetric resource consumption that he takes part it.
I just think if you’re one of the most privileged people on the planet and you think the world is dying you ought to live a life which if the average person lived would be sustainable. Not do some token effort, far below that of your average poor person, and claim that’s all you can manage.
Any reduction in the resources used from agriculture? If he could be eating red meat daily, but instead only eats cheese and fish occasionally… That’s good, if not perfect.
Vegetarianism (or in his case pescetarianism) is not inherently reductionarian, so him saying he’s become much more vegetarian isn’t really meaningful without knowing how much of that land based meat was replaced with fish and cheese. Dairy comes from cattle or other ruminants, just like red meat. Fishing is ravaging the seas like agriculture is ravaging the land.
Erwin routinely relocated animals from areas that had high human interaction to conservation or animal refugee. He never used tranquilizes while showing the animals of left alone, were no threat.
The one that “got him” only got him because he didn’t believe in harming animals and he could have easily survived it.
Grew up with this stupid interpretation that it refers to some small gate in Jerusalem that camels had to bend down to use or something.
Jesus literally gives the answer in the next sentence:
”Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.” Those who heard it said, “Then who can be saved?” He replied, “What is impossible for mortals is possible for God.”“ Luke 18:25-27 NRSV
God can save anyone. And my layman’s interpretation on top of it, no man can save himself.
Well yeah, but if you’re a Christian you believe that it’s literally God telling you that you can’t be rich and go to heaven. God may make an exception, but it would be just as absurd for you to count on being an exception to this rule as it would be for you to count on being the exception to the rule that “none come to the father but through me”. If you’re rich, you’re just as damned as if you were never Christian to begin with.
I am a Christian and I think your argument is weak. That Jesus talks of a rich person here is irrelevant, the core of Jesus teaching is that salvation is a gift freely given, but not something we can obtain in our own power.
Fair point, what I meant is that in relation to being saved, it’s irrelevant he is rich because only God can save people. In relation to the hardships you’d face with being a Christian and rich it’s valid.
One thing I never understood was how any of it could be taken seriously if I could do literally anything and then go to confession and it’s all ok. Like imagine the absolute most atrocious thing one could do, then admit you did it to a priest, and you’re good? What if you just did that over and over again?
I’m not looking to “slam” Christianity, I’m just curious about that part.
It is something you can see the early Christians debating as well.
This is a take from James 2 “”What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if you say you have faith but do not have works? Can faith save you? If a brother or sister is naked and lacks daily food, and one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and eat your fill,” and yet you do not supply their bodily needs, what is the good of that? So faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead. But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I by my works will show you my faith.“ James 2:14-18 NRSV
And this is from Romans written by Paul
”There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death.“ Romans 8:1-2 NRSV
”because if you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For one believes with the heart and so is justified, and one confesses with the mouth and so is saved.“ Romans 10:9-10 NRSV
And from Ephesians (which might have been written by Paul) ”For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God— not the result of works, so that no one may boast.“ Ephesians 2:8-9 NRSV
I’m just cherry picking a bit here, plus there was of course much more debate on this topic than what we have documented. My personal thought on is it that, while it may seem wildly unfair, what other alternative than “saved by grace” could there really be that doesn’t result in people saving themselves. If Jesus truly paid the price, what else is there to pay?
The concept of “works” without knowing that term exactly was always how I explained myself: in that I may not have any faith, but if any of this is real I should be judged by my actions regardless of what I believe to be true.
I can understand your viewpoint and while there are verses in the bible that are very clear on Jesus being the “way”, I personally think God is doing everything he can to save as many as possible. And if someone is living in accordance with how God wants us to live I genuinely hope that is enough.
I mean, you also have many people from other religions who dedicate their whole life to knowing God and following his teaching. Sure if the teaching is evil, that’s an issue, but many religions follow the same basic principles and I think there is more to it than just whether you specifically call yourself a Christian. Don’t really have any bible verses to support it, just my personal conviction.
If you sincerely make the choice to follow Jesus, you would feel immense empathy and guilt about bringing calamity on your fellow human beings. If you had already done so, you’d be moved to repent and atone with those you afflicted, with whatever life you had left.
That’s the power of Christ’s love.
If you were an evil mustache twirling villain who thinks “I can just say some words and act real sad and I get zero consequences for all the evil stuff I enjoyed doing”, you’re fooling yourself. As if God would be some kind of mall cop and not see the evil heart right through it lol.
You know someone’s heart by their works and their nature. They aren’t saved by good deeds, but good will towards their neighbors is a side effect of being saved.
This is why it’s so heartbreaking seeing how people abuse the name of Christ to get people’s guards down, before dragging both through the mud. Evil’s best footsoldiers are hateful “Christians in name only”.
People always ask about a certain funny-mustached dictator’s final thoughts alone in a bunker. “What if he really meant it? Would Jesus forgive him?”
Yep! But I imagine if we’re honest with ourselves and he was actually leaning that way, he would have put a stop to his atrocities much sooner. A confession only out of the sudden realization of impending consequences is seldom a change of heart.
That Jesus talks of a rich person here is irrelevant
It’s really very relevant:
20 “All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?”
21 Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”
22 When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.
23 Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24 Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”
The message here isn’t about buying your way into heaven, it’s about earthly attachments. In part it is about sacrificing your own desires, but ultimately it’s about split loyalties. If you want to enter heaven, you cannot be burdened by avarice, by the desire for possessions. And if you truly seek to follow what Jesus is teaching, then you would give up everything to do it.
I agree, but I think making it to sound like Jesus says rich people can’t be saved is a misinterpretation. It seems to me he says it’s hard for rich people to truly follow him and his teaching, and that only God can save people.
The problem is, if after hearing the teaching you are still rich then you haven’t understood the teaching or really accepted the message - because you are still attached to your worldly possessions.
It’s not that “rich people can’t be saved”… it’s that being rich and following Jesus are fundamentally incompatible. You can’t be rich and “truly follow him”, as you put it.
The easiest thought experiment here is asking “But how do you get rich?”
Well, it’s certainly not by putting others first and being fair and equitable in all your dealings. That’s against the “game” (oh sorry, “best practices”) of business.
A ton of capitalist co-opting of Christianity makes all kinds of excuses for why a Godly person could work 1,000,000x harder than everyone else and be “blessed” with the burdens of wealth, but it’s all propaganda.
Inheritance maybe? Okay, the question still becomes: What did you do with your resources?
Being honest with these questions makes the truth rather apparent, in my humble opinion.
Context is important. Literally the next couple verses in both passages say something along the lines of "The disciples asked, ‘Then who can be saved?’ Jesus said, ‘With people it is impossible, but not with God; for all things are possible with God.’ "
I think it isn’t really to do with the money itself but with the mindset. If you’re the type to dodge taxes and scam people, and love money above all, which is arguably what it takes to become rich, then you clearly aren’t a Christian transformed by God.
I had a family member like this… They’d go off about how awful capitalism is, and the shit that goes with it (to which I’d generally agree) but have a house full of google home devices, brag about how much they buy on amazon, and simp for the giant megacorp for which they worked a retail job…
Varoufakis is just one of many people who have come up with fancy new terms for capitalism and imperialism. It’s not to say that he doesn’t have an important perspective on some things, but coming up with new terms for things defined over a century ago only serves to distract.
Wouldn’t the best term be mercantilism? Power through the accumulation of wealth, but instead of nations it’s now corporations. It’s definitely not capitalist since capitalism is about having competition, and that doesn’t happen without constant government intervention to break up monopolies and trusts.
over a century ago Lenin has defined imperialism as capitalism in decay, monopoly capitalism, capitalism that has outgrown competition, that has stopped playing a progressive role in history and became solely a force of reaction, and since then not much has changed
I think the problem with capitalism isn’t the cool stuff that has been produced under it, it’s everything else about it. Literally the only reason to forgo buying a MacBook or a Google Home device as some sort of anti-capitalism spite move is to have the upper hand in conversations like this. In reality, you not making those purchases won’t move the needle in any way. If it did, it would be in the negative. Our entire economic system and system of employment relies on making purchases like that. Consumer spending is the economy.
Fundamentally there is no difference between buying an iPhone vs any other phone in terms of its support for capitalism. If anything, an iPhone might be better. Apple actually inspects its factories and at least pays lip service to stopping the most egregious abuses like forced or child labour. That white box Chinese android phone? If anything was built by forced or child labour, it’s that.
So targeting individuals for their purchases is both pointless and counterproductive. If you want to affect change, then vote, protest, organize. Push for and support proper regulation and controls. Make it so that people’s employment isn’t required for them to get healthcare, services, shelter. Make it so that an economic recession impacts those with the most, not those with the least.
Stressing about trying to make the least capitalist choice under a capitalist system just does exactly what they want you to do. The more time you spend judging your neighbour, the less time you spend looking up and see who’s really fucking you.
Thank you. I was trying to figure out how to express my opinion on this matter, and you pretty much did. We’re all allies in this, just by virtue of the fact that we were born into it. Let your fellow man do their thing, knowing they probably made the best decision possible with the information they had, and focus on systemic improvements, instead of trying to control one dude at the end of the line.
I spose you missed the part where I generally agreed with his criticisms (as someone who is also part of the system), and how the focus of my reply was the simping and bragging.
I always love working with partitions because of the knowledge it gives you, but it is also certainly dangerous and from time to time it is unnevitable to suffer an accident. In any case I always try to do this type of operations with parted and if possible with GUI (gparted).
Being in the photo situation, can’t you make a fsck as the error messages tell you?
fsck /dev/nvme0n1p2
If not, the most practical would be, IMHO, to boot from a rescue live, e.g. www.system-rescue.org/Download/Once booted, you can lift the graphical interface with startx and do with gparted the operations you need on these partitions.
The existing file system appears to have been damaged possibly because cfdisk has not adjusted (shrinked) the existing file system before changing the partition settings. In my case, this kind of thing I only dare to do with gparted if partitions contain file systems with data.
I would try the second option I mentioned above, as my last chance: to start a live-rescue and look that allows us to gparted, but I am not very optimistic about it
We thank Dave for his decisive contribution. For future occasions try to backup everything before doing operations of this type. This small script works very well for me:
cfdisk only changes the partition table, this table like a small paper that you store at the front (or back) of drive where you put information, it’s just a list of coordinates like from this point to this point is your home, from this to this is your yard, from this to this is your neighbor. Just because you changed the values on your paper doesn’t actually make your neighbor closer or further.
System read this list to figure out where are the “borders” between different sections that you defined to load and use them logically for multiple file systems.
The partition table is just a set of pointers to various places on the physical disk where partitions should be, inside those partitions are filesystems with all your data. It’s like the table of contents in a book. You can mess around with the table of contents and make the page numbers for chapters different, but all the words in the book are still there.
Now you’re lucky that filesystem drivers are fairly smart these days. They sanity check things all the time. When you write the partition table to disk all the active filesystem drivers get notified of the changes, so they can keep track of things. When the driver noticed that the size of your filesystem exceeded the size of your partition, it basically was like “Hold it right there, I’m not touching any of this!”. At that point the filesystem would have been forcibly unmounted and disconnected, which is why none of your commands worked after running cfdisk, they were on that filesystem.
Note that your approach was almost the right way to do it. To make your filesystem bigger you can expand the partition using cfdisk ( as long as there is physical room on the disk!) and then run a program called resize2fs , and it will expand the filesystem to suit.
Similarly, you can shrink the filesystem in the same kind of way, except you run resize2fs first and command it to shrink the filesystem to a particular size. It will do that (assuming there’s enough free space in your filesystem to do so) then you shrink the corresponding partition with cfdisk to match.
Of course, as you’ve learned, resizing partitions is moderately risky so backups are a good idea. Having said that I routinely expand filesystems in VMs like this without backups - I make the VMs disk larger in its settings, then run cfdisk and expand the partition, then run resize2fs.
I sincerely appreciate your consideration to help and explain
Its funny that i tried resize partitions without knowing how to do that. I thought i should format new partitions after editing partition table coz thats what i did when installing linux, but im wrong again ig.
Call sorry.next().value as many times as you need to baby, hell you can even use it in a for-of loop because Generator functions are Iterable. I fucking love JavaScript
just to add a little more explanation to what the other posters are suggesting… a hard drive, from the perspective of your OS is very very simple. it’s a series of bytes. for the sake of this example, let’s say there are 1000 of them. they are just a series of numbers.
how do you tell apart which numbers belong to which partitions? well there’s a convention: you decide that the first 10 of those numbers can be a label to indicate where partions start. e.g. your efi starts at #11 and ends at #61. root at starts at #61 and ends at #800. the label doesn’t say anything about the bytes after that.
how do you know which bytes in the partions make up files? similar sort of game with a file system within the bounds of that partion - you use some of the data as a label to find the file data. maybe bytes 71-78 indicate that you can find ~/.bash_histor at bytes 732-790.
what happened when you shrunk that root partions, is you changed that label at the beginning. your root partion, it says, now starts at byte #61 and goes to #300. any bytes after that, are fair game for a new partion and filesystem to overwrite.
the point of all this, is that so far all you’ve done is changed some labels. the bytes that make up your files are still on the disk, but perhaps not findable. however - because every process that writes to the disk will trust those labels, any operation you do to the disk, including mounting it has a chance to overwrite the data that makes up your files.
this means:
most of your files are probably recoverable
do not boot the operating system on that drive, or any other that will attempt to mount it, because you risk overwring data
before you start using any data recovery tools, make a copy of the raw bytes of the disk to a different disk, so that if the tools mess up you have an option to try again
ONLY after that is done, the first thing I’d try is setting that partion label back to what it used to say, 100gb… if you’re lucky, everything will just work. if you aren’t, tools like ‘photorec’ can crawl the raw bytes of the disk and try and output whatever files they find.
I’ve just been following community guidelines, which is to change the title of a post from “Name That Song” to the song title when someone guesses it. I see your point though. I’ll mention it to who runs it and see what they think.
What they’re suggesting is to back up the whole disk, rather than any single partition. Anything you do to the partition to try and recover it has the potential to make a rescuable situation hopeless. If you have a copy of the exact state of every single bit on the drive, then you can try and fix it safe in the knowledge that you can always get back to exactly where you are now if you make it worse
Also, it’s probably possible to fix the partition so that it’s as big as it used to be. It’s likely that some of your data is corrupted already, but the repartitioning won’t have erased the old data except here or there where it’s written things like new file tables in space it now considers unused
Yes a back up is possible. Don’t back up partitions, back up the whole device. All 150+g at once.
Whenever you try to mount the device or the filesystems, make sure to mount it read-only so that no changes are written to the device.
Also, shrinking 84g of data into 32g is definitely not possible. Just changing the fdisk partition table doesn’t shrink or relocate the data. You need a filesystem-aware resizing tool to shrink the filesystem before shrinking the partition.
Hopefully you can just change the partition table back to the original values and get a clean fsck.
I read the comic as referring to adblocking software as opposed to any specific extension. I can’t pinpoint what gives me that idea though so who knows
I was talking with a sysadmin once who intentionally removed nano and emacs from any system he was granted access to. His explanation was “if they can’t use vim I don’t want them on my machines”
Brilliant! I don’t entirely disagree with that. I had vim forced on me at my old job, including actual vi on some of the more ancient systems. I got so used to it that I don’t really know how to use nano and definitely not emacs.
I never understood what the big deal was. Write. Quit. If you can’t remember that ‘w’ means write and ‘q’ means quit, I don’t know how else to help. Add in some decent options in your vimrc and it is pretty comfortable. I am in no way some guru who knows every shortcut and fancy command out there, but I like using it and it is the first thing I install on a new system.
I am not one to judge what text editor, OS, phone, car, or computer you like. You do you. If I was a sysadmin that had to deal with people who really shouldn’t be on those systems and that was an easy way to discourage people from screwing with it, then hell yeah.
Knowing VIM does not make one a better sys-admin. You can be an idiot, and still know how to drive Vi/Vim. There is FAR FAR FAR more to managing an OS and than that. If you think requiring VIM is enough to keep unknowledgeable people away from servers, you are probably the one who shouldn’t be managing servers.
lemmy.ml
Active