Idk, I feel like their first few albums sounded pretty different to the ones that came later.

I think that describes everyone, if you are edgy enough.

I think probably boredom in most cases

Some “vandals” can be very clever and creative

Outside of VPS firewalls settings and fail2ban, is there anything else you’d recommend to harden the VPS?

Idk about audio but they rate limit video pretty quickly. Audio might be low enough bandwidth for them to not care, but be cautious

Is there a reason not to use pangolin for the public stuff too?

I’m just about to make the switch from CloudFlare to pangolin on VPS, and I wanna make sure I’m not missing anything

Yeah, but have you considered; penises?

Penises.

Good to know. Idk why someone would do that on Lemmy, but I guess I’ll have to keep an eye out

At the very least it wouldn’t get you kicked out of an interview at Tesla

What the fuck?

I think you need to clarify, because it sounds like you’re saying that the only reason that people have a problem with Nazis is PC culture.

and that you’re saying people making a big deal about Nazis is a bad thing, people should either not care about Nazis or return to not doing anything about Nazis even if they cared?

Keep in mind this is in the context of doing a full Nazi salute, which is pretty unambiguous.

Is that really the hill you want to die on?

Naw.

Poop on their desk

Well they didn’t say you couldnt get arrested.

A few years ago I’d have said a Nazi salute.

But now I have to ask clarifying questions, like the location of the interview

Nope. That’s kind of a strange leap to make based on what I said. Do people who make poems about their work typically just send them to their boss?

Naw, it’s not uncommon, especially when writing on mobile. On small screens or windows, a long sentence can be many lines and look like a paragraph if you’re not really thinking about it and putting in line breaks based on looks and vibes.

Years ago I made a whole silly poem about my mortification upon discovering I had done this in a work email, having read it in a much larger window than the one I composed it in.

Good in theory, problematic in practice. A goal to strive towards but not achieve.

The main problem is that the dictatorship of the proletariat is so easily corrupted into a regular ol dictatorship. It’s supposed to be a transitional period, but when that much power is in play, it’s hard for people to give it up - and even when they’re willing, they can just get ousted by less scrupulous people.

Making it safely through that passage is like a Great Filter of socio-economics

They do basically what I’m describing, just not as well because they don’t have as much of an incentive. Are end users willing to pay for these more advanced models?

Well there you go. It could be authoritarian, except an authoritarian govt isn’t subsidizing it. Exactly like I described.

Governments, however, are willing to pay that amount. Why?

You keep walking straight into the points I’m making.

That, in itself, isn’t authoritarian

Wrong. Setting up a super invasive surveillance system is inherently authoritarian, even if they initially happen to use it for reasons that don’t typify authoritarianism. You have to bend over backwards so hard to keep it from becoming authoritarian, that it will just naturally corrupt any entity that deploys it, even making the monumental assumption that an entity that deploys this didn’t have the intention to use it for nefarious purposes from the start.

it’s only authoritarian of there’s some enforcement arm to enforce obedience or punish disobedience.

Is a rather clumsy piece of mental gymnastics. Not only have you said it before. You can use this argument, coupled with your earlier “it’s constituent parts aren’t authoritarian” to argue that nothing is authoritarian.

Again, I disagree. Something is only political when used for political ends.

And again this is just the pro-gun argument. Fine on paper, useless in reality.

I’m making the argument that it is possible for software to be political even if it wasn’t created as such. I only need to show that a single case is possible.
You are making the argument that it is impossible, and you keep trying to prove it by example.

Welcome, it’s been like this for a while.
We have no idea what to do about it.

Again, in theory in a vacuum, I agree. But I disagree that anything you describe could actually be both commercially viable and deployable without authoritarian involvement

In your example do you not see all the gymnastics and bending over backwards you need to do to avoid the inherent nature of the system? I’d go so far as to say that the people in your theoretical HOA are analogous to supporters of a authoritarian regime.

You’re making a pro-gun argument here, and it’s not convincing for similar reasons: products are more than the sum of their parts, and the actual application of a product matters more than the theoretical use. If it is nearly impossible to meaningfully use apolitically, then it is not apolitical.