interolivary

u/interolivary@beehaw.org
43 posts · 113 comments

Recent posts

Recent comments

I can recommend Kagi. Yes, it'll cost you to use it (but not a lot, eg. I'm on the $10/month plan), but people expecting to get everything for free online is what got us into this mess in the first place.

on I mean I certainly would · c/memes · 60 pts · 3y

No no, you don't understand: the rules only apply to plebs like you and me. Corporations and their rich executives are free to do anything they want

These failures "should not be viewed as rare anomalies, but rather as systemic weaknesses that if not remedied, are likely to result in future harm to children in CBP custody,"

So in actuality her death wasn't preventable. It could have been if the system was something else than what it is, but it isn't and likely won't be.

For me, the whole point of paying for streaming was so that I could support the film makers without dealing with ads.

That doesn't sound profitable. How about artists and content creators only getting 0.1% of the profits and you have to watch ads? That sounds like it'd make the executives much richer.

A-ha, I knew there have to be lock nerds on Lemmy.

But yeah the basics are dead simple, you just need to have a light touch and listen to your fingers 😄

And so much of the stuff applies for the majority of lock mechanisms. A lot of it boils down to "apply tension, feel for pins / disks / sliders / wafers / whatever that don't want to move and then you make them move, while leaving the other pins / etc. alone. Repeat until done"

Right?!

The coolest one I have is probably this weird prototype lock called the RKS or "RoboKey System", which is sort of like a cross between a regular door lock (it's in an Abloy body) and a safe combination lock. The idea behind it was that you'd have a small portable device (only slightly larger than a key fob) that would be used to dial open the lock, and that device would be remotely programmable, meaning access could be granted and revoked remotely (you're just sending ). The prototype locks are cutaways so you can see what's going on inside, but the "real" ones would have been completely sealed. Basically they'd have lots of the pros of electronic locks but without having to have powered and/or complicated locks that are sensitive to environmental conditions, so they would have been great in challenging environments where you'd want the upsides of electronic locks but can't use the current ones (I think marine shipping was one thing they envisioned could benefit from them.) Unfortunately it didn't take off, so some hundreds of prototypes are all that exist. They still make them on occasion, purely for us lock nerds 😄

It's not just two, it's two "big" ones and a bunch of eg. neo-Nazi ones, Lemmygrad, spammers and so on. I vaguely remember there being some sort of blocklist that a lot of the instances use, but don't quote me on that.

Lemmy's vanilla UI has the list of connected and blocked instances under /instances, so eg. https://beehaw.org/instances

I've been on a hiatus due to some medical stuff making it hard for me to concentrate, but I'm a lock nerd. I collect cool locks ("cool" being very subjective here 😅) and pick / manipulate them.

edit: here's a tiny part of my collection. I'd upload more but I'm having a hard time with the mobile site and image uploads

on It's Open Source! · c/memes · 10 pts · 3y

Sure, someone knows how to audit code.

Whether that someone is inclined to do it for whatever random FOSS package / library / application / service / whatever is a different question.

I understand that people get angry when they have to wait in line for ages and usually due to something having gone wrong in the first place, but dumping that anger onto a hapless call center employee who's in many ways — like you said – also a victim of the same company is Not Cool™.

"Magic-free recipe" that only involves a little bit of retrocausality, as a treat.

While the article was interesting, I couldn't quite grasp the analogies the authors were using. Or, rather, the analogies themselves were understandable, but so far removed from the actual physics that their connection to how entanglement works wasn't very clear. But I guess this is the problem with trying to explain concepts like this to a lay audience