Pika

reminds me of my first mail server, accidentally set up an open relay and got a lot of abuse reports from mail providers saying they blocked my server due to it. Took forever to get fixed again.

It’s something on your end, I just VPN’d through both Fortaleza and Sao Paulo and both can load Weebly just fine

this is basically what I did until I dropped fish for zsh because of annoyances with how it functioned.

Scripting in fish is obnoxious though if you learned bash first, heavily recommend staying far away 😂

Hard recommend staying in bash or at least zsh, at least you maintain compatibility with others if you ever decided to share your scripts.

Honestly, the only one I’m really looking at is Ranch Sim because it’s down to like 2.50, none of the other ones really look all that attractive, to be honest.

Kicking myself for buying Icarus when it was $20 because it’s now 3.50

I hope that some point all models that are pay to use are like this. I might be on board with free to use models falling under Creative Commons but like, anything business or to be sold as a service based needs compensation no ifs, ands or buts.

Personally I think the same argument pirates use with content can be used here. Usage of the art generators != a sale for the artist. I don’t agree with artists not being compensated either piracy is piracy regardless if its a big company or an artist.

However, It was already a stretch to claim that pirating a digital media that is 1:1 is equal to losing a sale, but it’s even even bigger stretch to claim that an image that is generated by a generator using training data of a bunch of artists and images pushed together would equal a sale. In most cases you wouldn’t even be able to identify the artist in the first place(or even know they existed).

As for driving the artists out of the market, I personally don’t believe it ever will manage that, because of how it works. It needs something to train off of, when artists decide to leave the market nothing new will be able to be trained, which will eventually kill off the ability to train them further, which will leave them either to use stale training data, or use existing models to train themselves, which have been pretty spotty in quality in general.

Plus, at the end of the day, art is a profession for many and a personal hobby for even more. I don’t think it’s going anywhere any time soon, regardless of tools available, I think I would say the same with LLM story-wrights as well, for any new field breaking genres or concepts, a humans touch is needed or else it will just piece together what it already knows.

Being said, hopefully some point the fields start actually paying for the content they are using, I expect it will eventually happen, its just legal frameworks are slow. (ignoring the few models out there that do pay for content like others have said such as Adobe)

Honestly my biggest concern is going to be what happens when those AI companies purchase data off of media websites who claim ownership of all data submitted. Usually they operate off a shared copyright where by submitting the content you allow them to use it how they see fit but you as the artist keep ownership. For example Deviantart while claiming they have no ownership also has this in their policy.

DeviantArt does not claim ownership rights in Your Content. For the sole purpose of enabling us to make your Content available through the Service, you grant DeviantArt a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to reproduce, distribute, re-format, store, prepare derivative works based on, and publicly display and perform Your Content

Which grants royalty free permission to redistribute how they please.

I wonder why companies do this? does it actually make it get done faster? Last I knew most workers were only efficient at their job for like the first 5 or 6 hours if that, spending an extra 8 ontop of it sounds like a waste of salary.

in the scamming world, its never the same person, like whoever implemented that policy was smoking something good.

In the fraudster world you either sell the codes that you ripped off a card, or you have another person buy the card to give it to you. It’s never the same person, the fact they are banning based off suspicious activity screams big head who doesn’t understand the impact or reason for their changes outside “defrauded cards bad”

So did I up until windows 10, which makes sense because my laptop that had run windows 8.1 had been upgraded from Windows 7 and had the issue every time it seems to have a version release. My windows 10 system was a factory install since I switched to a PC instead of a laptop at that time, and as such ran UEFI out of the box, I haven’t had any issue with windows nuking a boot partition since.

I’m assuming it’s because bios boot still uses an MBR which means the actual boot record is at the beginning of the disk, which windows also tries to use for recovery and its boot. With GPT setups like how UEFI requires, there’s a dedicated partition that is used instead for storing EFI files, so it allows for a much clearer co-existence.

Basically if you are running a UEFI system, there’s no excuse for Windows to actually nuke grub anymore, because the entire reason it was nuking it in the first place was it was overwriting the MBR at the beginning of the disk so the system no longer knew where grub was. With UEFI the system boot would be the UEFI loader -> windows loader or grub (or like how my system is brokenly setup UEFI -> grub -> windows because I like the traditional style of selecting windows from grub)

that’s the fun part! you don’t 🦊

Yeah, I was gonna say I dual boot and I can’t recall the last time that Windows nuked my UEFI bootloader.

But back when Windows still did BIOS boot, it was like every major release without fail.

edit: Rewreading your post it sounds like you meant updating the BIOS as a whole and not BIOS boot, so that’s my bad. Yeah, I definitely haven’t seen your circumstance, I had that happen consistently before Microsoft embraced the UEFI style booting

fully agree, mine isnt accessible to the outside world either but, you never know if something gets missed or somehow a path gets made. would rather not open up that risk

Sadly no recommendations, I still use portainer myself

while docker does have a non-root installer, the default installer for docker is docker as root, containers as non-root, but since in order to manage docker as a whole it would need access to the socket, if docker has root the container by extension has root.

Even so, if docker was installed in a root-less environment then a compromised manager container would still compromise everything on that docker system, as a core requirement for these types of containers are access to the docker socket which still isn’t great but is still better than full root access.

To answer the question: No it doesn’t require it to function, but the default configuration is root, and even in rootless environment a compromise of the management container that is meant to control other containers will result in full compromise of the docker environment.

man, arcane looks amazing, I ended up deciding off it though as their pull requests look like they use copilot for a lot of code for new features. Not that I personally have an issue with this but, I’ve seen enough issues where copilot or various AI agents add security vulnerabilities by mistake and they aren’t caught, so I would rather stray away from those types of projects at least until that issue becomes less common/frequent.

For something as detrimental as a management console to a program that runs as root on most systems, and would provide access to potentially high secure locations, I would not want such a program having security vulnerabilities.

Regardless of my opinions for it, it’ll be a societal requirement with the advancement of technology unless we wish to move away from a monetary based system.

I personally am fully for it, I am concerned about the productivity drop if it is implemented too early, however such a system needs to exist for continued societal functionality.

wait can it? I thought most resets nuke the keystore to prevent the decryption key from being seen. Thats concerning.

agree, why I mentioned that in the post. Still doesn’t change the outcome that it degraded the channel which was why I used it as an example.

yea you have it yes, if they have confirmation that you had said evidence, and they were seizing the device to collect more evidence regarding it then it would be obstruction of justice and destroying evidence, but they need to be able to prove that claim. Unless they can prove that claim then it’s an unlawful search (excluding port authority specific laws regarding searches because checkpoints generally have reduced restrictions on lawful searches)

The exact circumstances around the search—such as why CBP wanted to search the phone in the first place—are not known

until this isn’t an unknown it’s impossible to voice opinion on the legality of this action. If they had evidence that there was something incriminating or against the law on the device and can prove the user intentionally destroyed the info to impede the investigation(honestly this last part is fairly easy as long as the first part can happen) then yea what he did would defo break the law, but until those aspects can be determined this seems like a massive abuse of that persons 1st(due to activism), 4th (due to the seizure of private property without a lawful search), and 5th(again private property) amendment rights.