A1kmm

joined 2 years ago
[–] A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.com 1 points 1 week ago

The terminology in Aus / NZ is pet (owned by people) vs stray (socialised around people but not owned) vs feral (not socialised to people).

Generally speaking, pets & strays like people - they've been handled as a kittens. Pets can become strays and vice versa. But feral cats (past being a kitten) will never become stray / pet (and vice versa) - it is only the next generation that can be raised differently.

While the article is defining feral cats as any cat that isn't a pet, in reality the vast majority of what it is talking about are truly feral cats - nothing like a house cat.

[–] A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.com 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

With the added complication that it's unlikely that Mangione actually killed anyone - someone killed someone in favour with the Magats, so by their logic, someone has to be killed to send a message.

Like how likely is the story that someone (who looked nothing like the surveillance photos released at the time) was called in by restaurant staff, and despite having allegedly travelled a long distance from the scene of the crime, and many opportunities to destroy everything, had a manifesto confessing to the crime, and the murder weapon still on him? Despite him having no prior inclination towards that sort of thing even?

Hopefully any jury has good critical thinking skills and can see through an obvious set up.

[–] A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.com 11 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

That's a false dichotomy though. There are ways to prevent cheating that don't rely on the security of the client against the owner of the device on which the client runs (which is what both of what your 'ways' are).

For one thing, it has long been a principle of good security to validate things on the server in a client-server application (which most multi-player games are). If they followed the principle of not sending data to a client that the user is not allowed to see, and not trusting the client (for example, by doing server-side validation, even after the fact, for things which are not allowed according to the rules of the game), they could make it so it is impossible to cheat by modifying the client, even if the client was F/L/OSS.

If they really can't do that (because their game design relies on low latency revelation of information, and their content distribution strategy doesn't cut it), they can also use statistical server-side cheat detection. For example, suppose that a player shoots within less than the realistic human reaction time of turning the corner when an enemy is present X out of Y times, but only A out of B times when no enemy is present. It is possible to calculate a p-value for X/Y - A/B (i.e. the probability of such an extreme difference given the player is not cheating). After correcting for multiple comparisons (due to multiple tests over time), it is possible to block cheaters without an unacceptable chance of false positives.

[–] A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.com 13 points 1 month ago

Amazon spokesperson Margaret Callahan described it as “obsolete” and said it “completely misrepresents Amazon’s current water usage strategy”.

Interesting that they don't say in which direction it misrepresents (is it saying it is too high or too low). Maybe they are hoping the reader will infer from what they are saying that they're using less now, without them having to say that.

[–] A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.com 15 points 1 month ago

They are not wrong that Israel is radicalised. However, peace is a process, and what will lead to an enduring peace is actually more important than what is just.

If Israel was actually willing to reconcile and treat Palestinians as equals, the South African model of truth & reconciliation (including amnesty for abuses in exchange for full disclosure of what happened), it wouldn't be just for the victims, but it would allow both sides to move on peacefully.

The real problem is that Netanyahu, Smoltrich, Ben Gvir etc... don't actually want peace, so even a neutral truth & reconciliation is currently unlikely to happen without their backers (especially the US) forcing them.

[–] A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.com 9 points 1 month ago

What jurisdiction is she in? And (if she knows) what jurisdiction is he in? (Jurisdiction as in country, and if the country has them, state / province). That will make a big difference to next steps.

[–] A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.com 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The whole "crime capital" thing being tacked on to the story is ridiculous. Never let facts get in the way of a good story I guess! According to the ABS, Victoria has the second lowest rate of offenders per capita of any Australian state or territory (order is ACT, VIC, TAS, SA, WA, NSW, NT).

[–] A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.com -1 points 1 month ago (7 children)

While someone's political beliefs are highly multi-dimensional, there are two axes that are commonly used to define where someone sits:

  • Economy - Left is favouring social responsibility for people receiving economic support (supporting people to meet their basic needs is everyone's collective responsibility), while right is favouring individual responsibility (meeting your basic needs is your responsibility, and if you die because you can't, even if it is due to something outside of your control, tough luck).
  • Social liberties - Social Libertarian is favouring individual decisions on anything not related to the economy / rights of others, while Social Authoritarianism supports government restrictions on social liberties.

Since there are independent axes, there are four quadrants:

  • Socially liberal, Economic left - e.g. Left Communism, Social Democrat, most Green parties, etc...
  • Socially authoritarian, Economic left - e.g. Stalin, Mao. Tankie is a slang term for people in this quadrant.
  • Socially liberal, Economic right - Sometimes called libertarian. Some people with this belief set call themselves Liberal in some countries.
  • Socially authoritarian, Economic right - e.g. Trump. Sometimes called conservatives.

That said, some people use tankie as cover for supporting socially authoritarian, economic right but formerly economic left countries(e.g. people who support Putin, who is not economically left in any sense).

[–] A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.com 16 points 2 months ago (5 children)

I'm not sure why people choose Youtube as their platform to criticise big tech like Google.

[–] A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.com 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Australia doesn't have that plant, but it has Dendrocnide sp. (Stinging Nettle Trees), which could arguably be worse when it comes to being venomous plants (i.e. plants that have an active mechanism for venom delivery, instead of just being poisonous). Also in the don't touch category unless you want pain that can last up to a year.

[–] A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.com 2 points 2 months ago

Does she know which Australian state? Likely every state has cyberstalking rules, but it would be a state law.

[–] A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.com 4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Cloudflare are notorious for shielding cybercrime sites. You can't even complain about abuse of Cloudflare about them, they'll just forward on your abuse complaint to the likely dodgy host of the cybercrime site. They don't even have a channel to complain to them about network abuse of their DNS services.

So they certainly are an enabler of the cybercriminals they purport to protect people from.

 

spoilerHe was the instar pupa.

94
submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.com to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
 

Today, lemmy.amxl.com suffered an outage because the rootful Lemmy podman container crashed out, and wouldn't restart.

Fixing it turned out to be more complicated than I expected, so I'm documenting the steps here in case anyone else has a similar issue with a podman container.

I tried restarting it, but got an unexpected error the internal IP address (which I hand assign to containers) was already in use, despite the fact it wasn't running.

I create my Lemmy services with podman-compose, so I deleted the Lemmy services with podman-compose down, and then re-created them with podman-compose up - that usually fixes things when they are really broken. But this time, I got a message like:

level=error msg=""IPAM error: requested ip address 172.19.10.11 is already allocated to container ID 36e1a622f261862d592b7ceb05db776051003a4422d6502ea483f275b5c390f2""

The only problem is that the referenced container actually didn't exist at all in the output of podman ps -a - in other words, podman thought the IP address was in use by a container that it didn't know anything about! The IP address has effectively been 'leaked'.

After digging into the internals, and a few false starts trying to track down where the leaked info was kept, I found it was kept in a BoltDB file at /run/containers/networks/ipam.db - that's apparently the 'IP allocation' database. Now, the good thing about /run is it is wiped on system restart - although I didn't really want to restart all my containers just to fix Lemmy.

BoltDB doesn't come with a lot of tools, but you can install a TUI editor like this: go install github.com/br0xen/boltbrowser@latest.

I made a backup of /run/containers/networks/ipam.db just in case I screwed it up.

Then I ran sudo ~/go/bin/boltbrowser /run/containers/networks/ipam.db to open the DB (this will lock the DB and stop any containers starting or otherwise changing IP statuses until you exit).

I found the networks that were impacted, and expanded the bucket (BoltDB has a hierarchy of buckets, and eventually you get key/value pairs) for those networks, and then for the CIDR ranges the leaked IP was in. In that list, I found a record with a value equal to the container that didn't actually exist. I used D to tell boltbrowser to delete that key/value pair. I also cleaned up under ids - where this time the key was the container ID that no longer existed - and repeated for both networks my container was in.

I then exited out of boltbrowser with q.

After that, I brought my Lemmy containers back up with podman-compose up -d - and everything then worked cleanly.

 

I'm logging my idea across a series of posts with essays on different sub-parts of it in a Lemmy community created for it.

What do you think - does anyone see any obvious problems that might come up as it is implemented? Is there anything you'd do differently?

There are still some big decisions (e.g. how to do the ZKP part, including what type of ZKPs to use), and some big unknowns (I'm still not certain implementing TLS 1.3 on TPM 2.0 primitives is going to stand up and/or create a valid audit hash attestation to go into the proof, and the proofs might test the limits of what's possible).

 

Looks like it is also flowing into huge numbers of people using the trams.

 

Stallman was right - non-Free JavaScript does hostile things like this to the user on who's computer it is running.

view more: next ›