100k left

Name the prime a “none”, the octave a sept.
Now, 2 “septaves”, c1 to c3, are a 14th. 2*7 = 14.

You can make off-by-one intervals work, but you have to constantly juggle some +1s or -1s compared to what we usually use.

If you counted distance in steps, then moving from your front door to your front door would be 0 steps, not one, and moving by 6 steps is twice the distance of 3 steps.

A piano with 5 septaves has 5*7 = 60 keys, wait.

So anyway mathematically one dodecave, one 12th, c1 to c2, has 12 segments, the frequency diffefence is 2. So a second, 2 notes, has 2/12 of that interval, the ratio is 2^2/12.
A first, a halftone, has 2^1/12 as its frequency ratio, and a none has 2^0/12 = 1, the same frequency.

No matter if you count physical keys, distance on a keyboard to change a note by, or mathematical frequency in the air, starting at 1 goes against our intuition, and when you try to add or multiply it is easy to get completely wrong results.

PS: You might want to go C to C on your 5 dodecave keyboard, in which case the concept of “started hour” etc. is familiar, you know to add one arriving at 61 keys, and you know that means an assymetry where one C doesn’t have 11 other keys to itself.
The other way around you’d have to subtract 4, so probably subtract 5 and add 1 since you were dealing with 5 tredecaves in your head not 1 base tredecave followed by 4 extension tredecaves.

Can’t you just replace the entire game folder?
Running a verify and repeating the action would even show how many files were changed.

In the basic case you go to settings and change permissions.

In the more typical case for os modifications, you go to that tab, open advanced properties, change the owner account by typing in “everyone” or your account name by hand, saving, closing reopening the advanced security settings, probably disable inheritance then create a new permission entry.

In the most extreme case, where you change files belonging to something critical like windows defender or edge, you can’t.
The only way I am aware of is booting into an older windows install iso, or a live linux iso, then performing the modifications there.

Disclaimer: I have not done this on windows 11 yet, but I can’t imagine the process got simplified.

Windows has a lot of systems that allow some more complicated modifications. Those are often unnecessarily obfuscated, the registry for example doesn’t have to be a weird custom database, it could have been part of the filesystem or at least a more standard database format. Windows will sometimes bite you with weird sketchy systems breaking expectations, and this tends to become inevitable when you try to change stuff Microsoft has decided to remove consumer choice on.
If Edge and the account push were as easy to avoid as learning how to take basic file ownership, we might not be where we are now (i.e. on Linux).

I’m not certain, can’t find any reliable info on this.
Shops don’t seem to specify the reflective material. In addition, aluminium is commonly used to describe the frame, and silver as a color for the frame or other parts, making it hard to get any info on the sales side.

On the production-tech side, I see some pages talk only about silver, others mention both silver and aluminium. Silver commonly has a description of the chemical process at times (silver nitrate silvering), haven’t seen one for aluminium yet.

Price wise, metal should be fully opaque around 10nm. Assuming a generous 100nm thickness, that makes 0.1€/m² worth of silver. I doubt material cost is a factor.

Performance wise, silver seems better than aluminium in its reflectance. Honestly I don’t get why anyone would be making aluminium mirrors.

Does anyone have more info on this?

Mirrors now are chemically deposited silver to my knowledge.
Deposited on the back of the glass, then a protective layer applied on top. The amount of silver in that assembly is very low, and none is exposed, but the reflective component is the silver.

You probably mean daemon-reexec, which also does not restart services (it better not, would be really problematic if it did).

I do mean reload, which has uses, otherwise it wouldn’t even exist and services would simply always reload: You may not want to reload yet, but keep a working state of service definitions in systemd while editing things, similar to typing away in a code file in production without saving yet.
I don’t see why I would need to “save” all my service definitions to get a usable (non-spammy) mount back, especially when my mount isn’t even part of systemd. How does the message even get sent by mount when mount is not aware of systemd?

PS: systemd can replace my text editor over my cold dead body

shutdown, reboot, … are symlinks on multiple different systemd repos, I have no reason to believe that is not the systemd standard.

systemd is not moving all it does into a single binary, obviously. Others already mentioned that and a bit further up I mentioned some systemd components that can be isolated too.

GNU posix is one extreme, and busybox the other, and the accusation is that the core of systemd sits too close to busybox, and the other projects might too group together things into fewer binaries that used to be multiple independent commands.

As for the core, I think that constitutes: services, logging (journald), cron+anacron (timers), blocking (systemd-inhibit), and mount.
I am probably missing some there. Timers does not interfere with other cron, but it is there whether you like it or not. Those components also come bundled with otherwise optional linux features like cgroup which do complicate using other posix tools with systemd, as you get unexpected results (like nohup not working).

My problem is 1) how do I revert to dedicated mount, and 2) mainly that I want to edit fstab, and mount without having to reload systemd. Dedicated mount doesn’t need a reload, it simply pulls config from fstab at time of call.

I also don’t see why you would ever want to reload service files due to editing fstab, it seems dumb in both directions. Those two systems should just be decoupled.

I need systemd-run to start a process in my startup scripts (that are a systemd oneshot service) so that the process won’t get killed when the startup scripts have run (subshells, nohup, … still keep the same systemd cgroup so get killed with the tree).
I need journalctl to get output from services, so basically every system and user process I didn’t explicitly start in a console. I don’t even know how to get info from systemd stuff in any other way, as they don’t have alternate logging facilities to my knowledge.
Systemd also ate my fstab at some point and translates mounts into services, but I haven’t really looked into that.

I think there were a few more components packed into this systemd core. Without the init system/servixe manager, logging, … you can’t really use systemd stuff including parts of that core.

Past that, things like networkd, resolved, … are very modular in my experience.
I can imagine running resolved under a different init system, and I have migrated both to and from resolved on systemd systems. They do still change old paradigms, resolved replaces a file not a service for example, but they do provide adequate translation layers and backwards compatibility in most cases (Though the mounts for example has lead to me getting 5 “run daemon-reload” info messages on every execution of mount before). An issue here might be when something only supports the new systemd interface not the old stuff, say a program directly calling resolved instead of looking at resolv.conf. But I haven’t seen that, and most of those interfaces seem decent enough to implement into systemd-alternatives.

Maybe someome who actually tried cherrypicking some systemd stuff into their system can provide some more experience?

Unix is where the model of linux commands originates, and those commands absolutely embody the unix philosophy.

Systemd is a bit like busybox in that many formerly standalone comands turn into symlinks to systemctl.
Take a look at shutdown for example.

Now I see shit again too. The unfortunate author may be torn on what to do.

Edit: https://github.com/AasishPokhrel/shit/issues/21
This issue mentions the name was changed.

Got renamed :(

Post should be marked nsfw

I’m not your bro, pal.

Yeah.
The maintenance of these conatellations is pricy, so perhaps if such an international program does prove itself trustworthy you’d see other national alternatives get retired.

I mean it’s not like the US would do it anyway as things stand, more likely for such a program to get started independently and to end up outcompeting starlink down the line.

You want a truly multinational organization responsible for it, nothing that can be controlled by a single nation, even one as (ex)influential as the us.
Something based on the UN perhaps.

Combine that with making internet access a human right, to stop denying connectivity outright.

Ideally then you could’t enforce meaningful censorship, but more realistically you would route regions to their respective governments servers so they could censor as before on their territory.
That would not guarantee free access to the internet to everyone, but should be an acceptable compromise to basically all nations.

After that, other doubting nations could still pull their own constellation, nothing is stopping that.

I would love if the internet program was uncensored, but that probably needs personal circumvention same as now, if such a program wants any degree of success.

Starlink should not just be nationalized but internationalized.
It is internet for everyone on earth, not everyone in the USA.

Every larger nation deploying their own constellation would be a pointless waste of resources, and every smaller nation having to find reliable partner-nations to tap into for that internet access would inevitably lead to people ending up without access due to political games.

Low orbit satellite constellations are the perfect candidate for sharing, they would literally sit unused over most of their orbits otherwise.

*gets downvoted to oblivion*
The lemmy experience

Please tell me you do at least proofread the unit tests though.

Ps: No your garbage

Android has swap, in my case 4GiB. It might also be compressed but parameters are probably incompressible anyway.

Given the runtime on ios, it seems unlikely swapping would be involved. Might be a failed hardware check of some sort, or the OS refusing to alot more ram to the authors specific specific app. Similar to running in the background, there seems to be a lot of chaos about ram allocation permissions on android.

Right now, I am working on an App and the Samsung Ultra S21 that I am using (even having 16GB of ram available…) does not allow me to use more than 500MB for this App even with android:largeHeap=“true” in the Manifest.

- late 2021, so