Town where I grew up had an awesome laser tag - you started off with a basic blaster but could unlock a shotgun (more damage, but fired slower and had limited ammo) and a rocket launcher (single shot insta kill) by doing different things in game

I don’t know, but there probably should be a line somewhere. More wealth than 99.9% of the rest of the planet sounds like a good place to start

Because in countries with functioning democracies, political power is narrowly scoped (your electors give you a mandate to do certain things, and if you act contrary to those interests you loose your power) and fleeting (you only have power as long as your electors continue to entrust that power to you, and can remove that power if they decide you are no longer fit to wield it).

Money, by contrast, is permanent (capital breeds capital) and unaccountable (you can choose to use the power your wealth grants without any regard for what others think - even if people disapprove, they can’t stop you spending it)

Simply by having a billion dollars means they have decided to hoard that wealth. They could give away 90% of it, leaving them with $100 million, it wouldn’t impact their quality of life in any way, and still leave them with more wealth than 99.9% of the planet. Imagine the good that $900 million could do if it was put to good use rather than sitting in a bank account as a status symbol - having the capability to do that good with no impact on yourself or your family and choosing not to makes you an immoral person.

Billionaires shouldn’t exist. At all.

always_has_been.gif

tl;dw - ed25519 keys are now the default

I don’t know that it’s that clear cut - trying to enforce a provision like that would almost certainly be seen as unreasonable, but unless there is some specific law forbidding it in your jurisdiction you’d probably need to ask a court if it conflicts with broader employment law rules to the level that a court would nullify it. Getting an answer to that question is likely to be very expensive, even if you are right.

I get boycotting Israeli companies because of the actions of the Israeli state, but characterising a private organisation as explicitly endorsing genocide simply because they are Israeli owned is bullshit

I’d want them to be just successful enough that they keep doing it - plowing time and energy that could otherwise be spent on fulfilling hobbies or real relationships - but not so successful that they could really commit to it. Like if they made ~$100/week, it’s not nothing but is it really worth the dozens of hours on weekends and evenings that you are spending to make that?

Place I used to work had a “we own all the IP you generate” clause, except it wasn’t very clearly written so could easily be read to mean literally all IP - write a song on the weekend, they own that. Got the wording tweaked in my contract to make it explicitly only cover things done in connection to my role, on company time, but I do wonder about my former colleagues. At least one of them has a mildly successful YouTube channel that I guess the company technically owns?

Because they are an Israeli company?

iDRAC and iLO are brand names for IPMI

You might also want to consider a Supermicro H12-SSLi - takes the same CPUs, but does PCIe 4

Yup - if your goal is to use Linux to learn how Linux works and how it’s all put together then Arch is awesome. If you’ve got stuff to do and Linux is a tool to reach another goal, not so much. I like my tools to be stable, reliable and predictable.

Not quite. Unsetting HISTFILE, or setting it to an invalid path will mean the shell doesn’t update the history file while it quits. set +o history makes the shell stop recording until you do set -o history, which is useful if you want shell history generally, but don’t want some specific commands to be recorded - if you just unset HISTFILE, the commands still show up if you press the up arrow

Talk to your cat about set +o history before they end up leaking credentials

With my finger on the trigger / I run dot slash configure / yo this package is big / but my package is bigger

Where I live at least, there is a difference because they are performing a task that they are being directed to perform as part of their job, as opposed to just randomly stumbling across hate while browsing the internet - if I’ve directed one of my staff to “submit a PR to this repo and work with the maintainers to get it merged” and some asshole drops into the comments they are being forced to engage in that situation, and that is not ok.

One case that I’ve heard of is a pizza delivery place that had to pay some serious compensation to a couple of their delivery people because they refused to stop accepting orders from someone who would be super abusive if their delivery person wasn’t a white guy. Management knew what was happening, the drivers had complained and asked for a resolution, management had refused to do anything about it, so the business had to pay compensation.

sigh, people suck.

This is actually something that bugs me about GitHub - I’m a Professional Software Developer, and we use GitHub enterprise internally at work (don’t @ me, we don’t have the budget to run our own infrastructure, BitBucket is crap and the sales person at GitLab ghosted me on 3 consecutive calls that we set up to discuss our needs). I’m also in charge of a team, and actively encourage the team to contribute to open source - find a bug? Draw up reproduction steps, report it upstream, and Fridays after lunch are dedicated to getting those bugs fixed. One of these days one of my team is going to run across one of these assholes, and I’m going to have a proper HR incident on my hands because that is a hostile work environment. Doesn’t matter that it is a member of the public being a dick, I’ve got an obligation to ensure that my staff have a workplace free of harassment, and I’ve got absolutely no recourse against this other than to say “cool, we don’t contribute to this repo anymore”.

That is pants-on-head insane and I love it