valaramech

joined 2 years ago
[–] valaramech@fedia.io 3 points 4 months ago

My understanding is that running most of BlueSky is possible on small to moderate hardware. However, running all of BlueSky requires basically cloning 100% of all the content on BlueSky (which, as of Nov 2024, was ~5 TB).

So, like, yes, one can run part of BlueSky or a clone of BlueSky which has none of the main instance's user's content without much trouble, but actually running an entire BlueSky stack is eventually going to become cost prohibitive.

I found this write-up to be enlightening on the subject.

[–] valaramech@fedia.io 23 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Ah, yes, let's make the already illegal thing even more illegal. As if that ever stopped anyone...

[–] valaramech@fedia.io 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Kurzgesagt made a video that I think is related to this. I found it rather enlightening: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuFlMtZmvY0

[–] valaramech@fedia.io 3 points 6 months ago

We don't do that here

Unless you live in California, they kinda do.

[–] valaramech@fedia.io 16 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I use uMatrix (uBlock's big brother), so sites that do this generally lose first-party JS privileges real fast.

[–] valaramech@fedia.io 2 points 7 months ago

Have you met these people IRL or online? Most of the people I've met online do fall into one of those two buckets, but almost nobody I've met IRL does.

I would assume this is selection bias before attributing it to some other thing. The kinds of circles you run in are going to heavily affect this.

[–] valaramech@fedia.io 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I read a decent rebuttal to the "paradox" of tolerance. To summarize for those that don't know, the idea is that tolerance is a social contract. You tolerate everyone that's behaving according to the contract. Refusing to tolerate someone that has broken the contract isn't a violation of the contract; it's required in order to enforce the contract.

You break the rules, you lose the protections. Simple as.

[–] valaramech@fedia.io 4 points 7 months ago

Sure, but now they can insinuate that China did it intentionally and get people real mad over bullshit to keep them distracted from other things. Maybe also to get their base behind the tariffs against China so they can then turn around and say that the price increases aren't the tariffs but Chinese retaliation against the tariffs.

[–] valaramech@fedia.io 8 points 7 months ago (1 children)

people who like Chicago deep dish are wrong

[Chicago will remember that]

[–] valaramech@fedia.io 14 points 8 months ago (6 children)

NASA gives SpaceX fat government paychecks. He doesn't want anything to happen to them.

[–] valaramech@fedia.io 37 points 8 months ago (15 children)

The 22nd amendment to the US Constitution bars Trump as a viable candidate for the Office of the President. It would require an additional amendment to be possible and there's no way that 3/4ths of all US states will agree to that shit.

The only potential loophole that I can discern is that there's no clear consensus on if Trump would be allowed to run as Vice-President on someone else's ticket. If he can, then, theoretically, he could run for VP and then have the elected President immediately resign, making him the President again.

[–] valaramech@fedia.io 19 points 8 months ago (2 children)

We've actually discovered a few of these! Though, nothing quite so catastrophic as you might be thinking.

view more: ‹ prev next ›