This is the way! It is absolutely amazing that the supposedly "brilliant brains" at lesswrong and other similar outfits, have not learned about the difference between an interpretation and a theory.
Since QM goes beyond our material world intuitions, I am personally loathe to clothe nrs in words, until we have more and better experiments. I think prematurely translating it into material-level intuitions just leads to a waste of time and much confusion.
What are you missing? Just write a bot that pulls interesting content into gopher, and start filling it. Since the protocol is so easy, nothing could be easier.
I am not looking for particular content, just for something that is interesting to read. Typically, that falls into the realm of things that people are passionate about. It may be a project. It may be an issue. It may be something they research in their spare time. It may be silly, or it may be serious.
While extolling the virtues of the protocol may fit in that, it gets excessive. Blogs that border on diaries strike me as too personal.
It's not that I'm looking for something on the scale or scope of the web. People have already written bots that pull over interesting content anyhow. What I am looking for is an environment that I'm comfortable with participating in.
Is it possible to get a modern filesystem with openbsd or are they still stuck in the past? Also, is it possible to run openbsd without jumping through hoops on a laptop from 2025 including suspend, graphics, web browser?
I want this to be the case, because the more Linux petrifies, the more a free BSD option is needed.
By default, OpenBSD uses FFS / FFS2. There is an effort in place to port GeFS (from 9front) to OpenBSD. It's unlikely that ZFS will be ported to OpenBSD, due to licensing incompatibilities. For the same reason, btrfs is also unlikely. That's why I run FreeBSD on my big server, and OpenBSD on my laptop and other edge devices. I don't really have any issues running FFS on a laptop; it seems overkill to run anything more advanced than that.
I'd recommend taking a look on forums to see what other folks are running. If it's a modern Lenovo with integrated graphics or an AMD GPU, it will be supported before others. OpenBSD folks tend to use Lenovos. My best recommendation is to pick a laptop that a core maintainer is using, unless you feel comfortable making your own patches. They have AMD GPU support via DRM from Linux. Intel graphics typically works alright.
OpenBSD works well with relatively recent versions of Chromium and Firefox. That being said, they are on a six month release cycle. The Chromium port can fall behind if you stick to -stable or releases. Building Chromium or Firefox from source is... well, I have a 2012 laptop, so that's not something I am going to do. Regardless, you'd need to be pretty comfortable with applying OpenBSD specific patches to one of these browsers, which isn't always obvious, especially since they are moving targets.
If you're used to being on a rolling release Linux, this will be a bit disorienting. But, in my opinion, it's significantly more stable and better thought out.
> OpenBSD works well with relatively recent versions of Chromium and Firefox. That being said, they are on a six month release cycle. The Chromium port can fall behind if you stick to -stable or releases.
Just to clarify here, security patches are backported to -stable. So it is not like you stick to the same browser release for six months.
Personally, I run www/firefox-esr. In part because the ESR moves more slowly in general and in part because it is maintained by someone working for Mozilla.
Excellent answer. Thank you very much. I will keep this in mind when the next life cycling of my current laptop happens. I will keep an eye on the core teams laptop experiments as well if there's anything about that available. Will search the mailinglists.
OpenBSD usually has far fewer hoops than Linux on laptops - IME, either it works or it doesn't. Pretty much any x86 machine that isn't bleeding edge is going to work.
Now add 100s or 1000s wounded at the same time, some can heal, and go back out to fight, some cannot, some will die during transport. The drone might be shot down, some areas are cleared. Simple? Not at all.
Risk calculations aside, don't forget to take into account how this could impact soldier morale. Just knowing that if injured a giant flying drone will attempt to airlift you to safety, regardless of how hopeless the situation on the ground looks like probably is a huge boost to morale.
... particularly if you know the other side treats their soldiers like the Star Wars CIS treated droids - completely and utterly expendable cannon fodder.
In the situation that Ukraine is, which is a desperate lack of money, ammunition ("thanks" to the US), weapons and soldiers, anything that purely exists to lift troop morale is already worth the effort, and if it even saves only one brave defender, it is more than worth it.
".. particularly if you know the other side treats their soldiers like the Star Wars CIS treated droids - completely and utterly expendable cannon fodder."
Except in reality they largely don't. Exceptions are the prison squads and alike, but the majority of the russian army consists of volunteers whose numbers are limited and Putin had to openly declare repeatedly there will be no mass mobilisation and those who are mobilized not put to combat in Ukraine. So despite some soviet military doctrin remaining, also the russian side had to learn soldiers are not expendable. (remember they had to bring in Korean soldiers?)
> Putin had to openly declare repeatedly there will be no mass mobilisation
Putin also declared he didn't want a war with Ukraine mere days before he started one [1]. You cannot believe a word that comes out of the mouth of any Russian official.
You consceeding that they dont except when they did and dont see that the after the fact 'apology' will somehow mean they wont again when they decide its worth doing like last time. Their words are worthless
> also the russian side had to learn soldiers are not expendable.
And yet they're still sending in troops with barely any ammunition worth the name. The Russian M.O. against the Ukrainian fortifications still is meatwaves.
> remember they had to bring in Korean soldiers?
And from what one can hear from the usual milblogger/OSINT/analyst crowd, the NK troops face brutal casualty rates as well [1].
For NK it's still a good deal, enough will survive the ordeal and return that they can teach their own army a bit about modern warfare.
A rah-rah attitude is great, but one should never underestimate an opponent. The reality is a stalemate with small groups occasionally moving past the front line. No meatwaves. This is true for both armies.
Don't feel bad. It is not about skill in those job, it is about "cultural fit". You must project a personality that will fit in with FAANG culture or you won't get the job unless you're famous globally due to having starting some huge open source project.
Comfort yourself with the fact that you did not have to sell your soul, sit through endless woke sexual harassment videos where you are taught that the white man is the source of all evil, and in endless management meetings.
Wonder if this will then be used to fulfill the dream of shooting ice bullets which then melt inside the victim, leaving less evidence. If memory serves, I think the CIA explored this at some remote point in time.
Concrete's not strong enough to be used as a bullet either- you'd need something roughly the size of a shotgun slug. If you're going that big, you aren't going for subtle.
It's kind of fascinating how all the bullshit TV copaganda scenes involving forensics have both been A) rightly decried as unrealistic by savvy viewers, and B) still been fairly realistic depictions of the field of forensics.
I imagine the boring truth is that, at least in America, getting shot with a normal "boring" bullet is less traceable than something special or something that mysteriously disappears.
For fictional purposes, the ballistic information disappears. You might know the murder victim was shot with an ice bullet, but you won't be able to match it to a specific weapon.
sounds like a problem that might be solvable by a new super ice that is 10x stronger and "can absorb much more energy and deform gradually" instead of disintegrating.
Since QM goes beyond our material world intuitions, I am personally loathe to clothe nrs in words, until we have more and better experiments. I think prematurely translating it into material-level intuitions just leads to a waste of time and much confusion.
reply