Any system which requires government coercion over individuals is never going to be feasible because the greedy will always find a way into power. That’s why it hasn’t worked for communism, and that’s why it hasn’t worked for capitalism. What we need is a government specifically set up to protect individuals from corporations. The more we can empower individuals and the common worker, the better off we will be. Communism is not the answer to that, neither is capitalism.
Because every time it has existed it just leads to a huge amount of government power without actually empowering the people. The people may be protected from corporations but they are not protected from their own government.
The government is run by the people, it’s a complete restructuring away from Capitalist ownership into public ownership. The people are not distinct from the government.
Shifting from an economy run by competing warlords to one owned and run by the people is indeed a vast improvement.
And how is that worked out? Every time it’s been tried the people who are in the government take all the power and rule with tyranny over their citizens. Communism only empowers the people in the minds of idealists who think that it works. Every time it’s actually implemented it’s just dictatorships under fancy names.
An excerpt from said doc if you don’t want to download it:
“Even in Stalin’s time there was collective leadership. The Western idea of a dictator within the Communist setup is exaggerated. Misunderstandings on that subject are caused by 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 Khrushchev will be the new captain. However, it does not appear that any of the present leaders will rise to the statue of Lenin and Stalin, so that it will be safer to assume that developments in Moscow will be along the lines of what is called collective leadership”
The idea that the USSR, PRC, Cuba, etc. are/were just “Dictatorships with fancy names” makes no attempt to do actual, material analysis of the structures in place in these countries.
the United States expanded the geographic scope of its actions beyond traditional area of operations, Central America and the Caribbean. Significant operations included the United States and United Kingdom–planned 1953 Iranian coup d’état, the 1961 Bay of Pigs Invasion targeting Cuba, and support for the overthrow of Sukarno by General Suharto in Indonesia. In addition, the U.S. has interfered in the national elections of countries, including Italy in 1948,[1] the Philippines in 1953, Japan in the 1950s and 1960s[2][3] Lebanon in 1957,[4] and Russia in 1996.[5] According to one study, the U.S. performed at least 81 overt and covert known interventions in foreign elections during the period 1946–2000.[6] According to another study, the U.S. engaged in 64 covert and six overt attempts at regime change during the Cold War.
Neither of those countries returned to a feudal system. Where are the nobles, with entrenched legal privileges, with titles passed down on a hereditary basis, commanding their own armies? What a ridiculous claim.
There are other monarchies in the world today that do hold political power. That doesn’t mean that they’re governing over a feudal system. The noble system I described is one of the defining characteristics of feudalism.
Okay, in the oversimplified graphic of the meme, I was including absolute monarchy under feudalism, since I thought it was closer to that than capitalism.
When I built a new PC last year, I was wondering how I managed to filled up a 4TB NVME in only 6 months… until I downloaded one of those programs that breaks down your hard drive usage.
Games, it’s all games. I don’t even consider myself a gamer. I can’t even begin to imagine the struggle of an actual gamer who is still stuck with a 256GB SATA SSD as their only high speed drive. What do you do when nearly every game that comes out these days is 100GB+ and requires an SSD?
It blows me away when I play a game like Valheim or Vampire Survivor and find out the game that took 1000 hours of my life is smaller than a two hour movie.
Also the system files aren’t really the most important files. While it’s a pain in the ass, you can reinstall your OS and get that all back again.
Reinstalling all of your games is going to take more time, and if you lost a save file, well you’re never getting that back. Personal photos, videos, etc. are even a bigger priority.
So I tend to to think of the drive /home is mounted on to be the “primary drive” as it’s the most important. The root is just the system files, needed for the OS, but not nearly as important as /home.
I insist Don Jr. pronounce his name differently, it sounds way too much like the female name Dawn and I’m worried people might think he’s a woke leftist calling himself a feminine name.
Because that’s what Raid 0 for, basically adding together storage space with faster reads and writes. The local backups are basically just to have earlier versions of (system) files, incrementally every hour, for reference or restoring. In case something goes wrong with the main root NVMe and a backup SSD at the same time (eg. trojan wiping everything), I still have exactly the same backups on my “workstation” (beefier server), on also a RAID 0 of 3 1 TB HDDs. And in case the house burns down or something, there are still daily full backups on Google Cloud and Hetzner.
If it fails, I will just throw in a new SSD and redo the backup. I sometimes delete everything and redo it anyway, for various reasons. In any case, I usually have all copies of all files on the original drive, as local backup on the device and backup on the workstation. And even if those three should fail - which I will immediately know, due to monitoring the systemd job - I still have daily backups on two different, global hosters as well as the seperate NAS. The only case in which all full backups would be affected would be a global destruction of all electronics due to solar storms or a general destruction of earth, in which case that’s the least of my problems. And in case the house burns down, and I only have the daily backups, potentially losing 24 hours of data, that’s also the least of my problems. Yes, generally using Raid 5 for backups is better, but in my case I have multiple copies of the same data at all times, surpassing the 321 rule (by far - 622, and soon 623). As all of my devices are connected via Gigabit, getting backups from eg. the workstation after the PC (with backups) died is just as fast as getting backups from the local PC backup Raid itself. And using Raid 0 is better (in speeds) than just slapping them together in series.
Umm … no. Raid 0 is a hold over from an earlier era when some programs needed mulitiple drives to act as one. It has no redundancy. There is very limited use for Raid 0 with modern drive sizes and most of them are in research where gigs of data are generated with a 10s experiment. If a single drive goes down in Raid 0 the whole volume is lost.
The Raid setup you are describing is Raid 1 (full backup) or 5 (distributed backup). Raid 0 for gaming is worse JBOD. Though the faster read times might mater for HDDs.
Edit: Further reading of your system setup looks custom and amounts to manual Raid 1 over Raid 0+JBOD. It’s also extremely high maintenance. If it works good on you but you could offload your data temporarily and configure the majority of your drives into Raid 6 to drastically reduce your maintenance level and stability/parity.
Well its for faster speeds. So I dont get why you would do a backup on a more fragile but faster storage. You described in another comment that you have many other backups, which is awesome. So good on you for taking care of everything. But yhea, using the opposite of what would be better for backups seems a bit counterintuitive to me. And to presume that it doesn’t matter to use the more secure option because you have many other backups anyway, is also slightly weird since why bother in the first place then.
I don’t mean any hate, you’re doing way better than me. Can I ask how fast the RAID 0 gets? And how much it would be on individual drives. And how much data you have to backup daily.
Much respect for your setup, you’ve taken redundancy seriously and I doubt you’ll ever lose anything.
The local backups are done hourly, and incrementally. They hold 2+ weeks of backups, which means I can roll back versions of packages easily, as the normal package cache is cleaned regularly. They also prevent losing individual files accidentally through weird behaviour of apps, or me.
The backups to my workstation are also done hourly, 15 minutes shifted for every device, and also incrementally. They protect against the device itself breaking, ransomware or some rouge program rm -rf’inf /, which would affect local backups too (as they’re mounted in /backups, but those are mainly for providing a file history as I said.)
As most drives are slower than the 1 Gbps ethernet, the local backups are just more convenient to access and use than the one on my workstation, but otherwise exactly the same.
The .tar.xz’d backups are actual backups, considering they are not easily accessible, and need to be unpacked and externally stored.
I didn’t measure the speeds of a normal SSD vs the raid - but it feels faster. Not a valid argument, of course. But in any way, I want to use it as Raid 0/Unraided for more storage space, so I can have 2 weeks of backups instead of 5 days (considering it always keeps space for 2 backups, I would have 200- GB of space instead of 700+).
The latest hourly backup is 1.3 GB in size, but if an application is used which has a single, big DB that can quickly shoot up to dozens of GB - relatively big for a homeserver hosting primarily my own stuff + a few things for my father. Like synapses’ DB has 20 GB alone. On an uneventful day, that would be 31 GB. With several updates done, which means dozens of new packages in cache, that could grow to 70+GB.
Yeah, I was just looking through some documentation on it. It says it uses a “digital wallet”. Maybe people are seeing that and thinking that means it’s blockchain-based? I’m not seeing anything more solid claiming there’s any blockchain involved, though. (I’m not 100% certain there isn’t any blockchain involved, though.)
It’s BS either way. Extra super plus plus BS if it’s blockchain-based. But still BS even if there’s no blockchain involved.
Yes, proles. Give up your only means of fighting back. We promise your right to vote is strong enough to protect you from anything. The government that can’t keep its own cops under control will save you. Trust big brother.
What’s fucking delusional is thinking that a bunch of civilians armed with handguns and rifles could ever match a modern military should it come to violent revolution or, alternatively, that arming civilians with the kind of weaponry that WOULD do the trick isn’t just a recipe for needless slaughter.
Nope, it categorically isn’t. That’s a strawman/false dichotomy combo so ridiculous that I doubt you’re actually sane enough to be entrusted with any weapon more dangerous than a camping spork.
Well I could show you my gun collection but at this point I’m fairly certain that you would just shit yourself in fear.
Anyway, have fun being unarmed with the state of the world today. The far right will continue stockpiling weapons and you’ll be knocking on the doors of guys like me if and when they finally decide to use them.
That’s the thing that you’re not getting bud. The far right isn’t going to be using their guns against the military or the government. They’re going to be using the guns against us.
Well I could show you my gun collection but at this point I’m fairly certain that you would just shit yourself in fear.
Typical ammosexual trait: can’t distinguish between common sense and cowardice 🙄
Anyway, have fun being unarmed with the state of the world today.
Thanks, I am and so is the vast majority of people in a radius of 1000+ miles from me.
The far right will continue stockpiling weapons
Because ridiculously lax laws and even more lax enforcement allows them to. They’re like politicians with bribes in that aspect.
you’ll be knocking on the doors of guys like me if and when they finally decide to use them.
Nah, I think I’ll just wait indoors until someone much more emotionally stable deals with it after your Rambo wannabe antics have gotten you killed.
The far right isn’t going to be using their guns against the military or the government. They’re going to be using the guns against us
And why is that? Because of the lack of laws, regulations, and enforcement. Not because wannabe tough guys like you don’t have enough penis extenders that go boom.
My brother in christ fascist won’t hesitate to kill you if you stand in their way. I am not gonna stand in their way without the means to defend myself because I am not suicidal. Forces of reaction WILL have weapons and they WILL use them. You aren’t going to convince the fascist to take their own guns away from them through voting
Statistically speaking (and assuming you’re an American) you are an overweight 40-something hermaphrodite with some college education, who has 1.8 children and is going to die of congestive heart failure.
There are three kinds of untruth. Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
It’s not actually about winning against the military. The civics justification for having guns is to make harassment campaigns more accessible when necessary. (Any sustained resistance resistance campaign would have to have outside supply lines.) No modern rebel group has taken on an established military on equal footing. The goal is to make oppressing the population extremely annoying, not to actually be in control yourself. In order to actually run a government you need a different set of skills than to run a resistance campaign, but a resistance campaign might become necessary until we can restore the government to a just one.
There’s other justifications for individual ownership of firearms, but that’s the one most similar to what you’re thinking of.
What’s fucking delusional is thinking that a bunch of civilians armed with handguns and rifles could ever match a modern military should it come to violent revolution
You just have to make it expensive enough that the military doesn’t want to fight, and you need to have enough of the civilian population on your side that the gov’t can’t control them, too. As the gov’t commits atrocities against its’ own people in an attempt to crush a rebellion, it ends up creating more ideological rebels.
And anyways, you’ll note that the US has tended to get pretty fucked up when dealing with insurgencies and guerilla warfare where it can’t leverage air superiority. How many, say, Air Force pilots do you think will start refusing orders when they find out that their last ‘precision bombing’ run killed 150 children in a hospital?
A lot of people are in the military for economic reasons; I don’t think a lot of them would turn on the fellow members of their class. Police, on the other hand…
I find it hilarious that these sickos suddenly support marx when he endorses their fetishes.
If Marx saw bump stocks cmags and all the other idiotic bullshit they use to murder children and innocents he’d call gun fetishists assholes and reassess.
memes
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.