Posts by rozenglass@fedi.dreamscape.link
 (DIR) Post #B446MAAjCIlHsejNAW by rozenglass@fedi.dreamscape.link
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @theresnotime@fox.nexus i can't say it's "bad" as an objective ultimate judgement, there's no ultimate bad, but for me, i strongly dislike it because it caused half a dozen production outages in various companies I worked at or consulted for, with bugs that are sometimes so silly and were left open in systemd's bug tracker for 5+ years.  the code is so big that no one can understand or maintain it really without things falling through the cracks for "edge-case" uses.  also, i once needed a special custom network setup that required modifying early network initialization stuff, and it took a few hours and less than a hundred lines of scripts on sysvinit boxes to get it working, but it took so much digging and time with systemd, and changes to C code in multiple massive projects like network manager and systemd-resolved and what not, and having them all work together and interface right around those new changes, to the point where we had to give up on the whole idea on all systemd-based systems.  i like BSD operating systems, and i like weird little custom OSes and distros, and the sudden reliance by so many software projects on systemd caused a lot of those things to break, and the answer in many cases was to just not support such OSes anymore.  for example, i had to use podman to deploy containers on some systems that didn't have systemd, and was surprised with how many bugs and crashes and weird issues i faced that all traced back to podman relying on random systemd features or not being tested on systems that don't have systemd.  finally, and more subjectively, i have a distaste for "big", "complex", "rewrites", and "corporate", and systemd ticks all of those, among others.  so, given the alternatives, i tend to opt for other init systems when i have the choice.anyway, this is what comes to mind for now, and other than that, i hope you have a good day :)
       
 (DIR) Post #B4IN7EIjyuAtmFNmka by rozenglass@fedi.dreamscape.link
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @sigmasternchen@comfy.social @SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo Knowing the public information does not make it less interesting to know what specific information a specific person is interested in.  Especially in high-stake political situations.  Visited website X.lol, is not as damning as visited 200 pages of the form X.lol/something-that-can-get-you-hanged.  And on lower stakes, not having TLS encryption means your ISP (and any listener in the middle, like your company or hospital or school, etc.) can build a psychological profile about you just from watching what you read.  And worst of all, they can inject changes into the pages you read without you knowing, from injecting ads, to changing the content to what fits them; TLS also validates that the page was not tampered with by your carrier.I still don't think that forced TLS server-side is a good idea, except for things like login pages, or if you know that the content of your site can get people in trouble if casually inspected by their ISP.  I think most of the internet should allow plain text connections if the client wanted that.  I do think that web clients for the general public should by default enforce TLS, and only allow removing that by the user's explicit request.
       
 (DIR) Post #B4JZv64WFGmxLEEfFg by rozenglass@fedi.dreamscape.link
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @sigmasternchen@comfy.social @SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo I think it's probably a good thing that big sites like Facebook or Twitter or such refuse plain text, because if they didn't, "oppressors" may force their populace to only use plain text browsers so they can spy on them, and the oppressed won't do much about it because they don't understand the implications.  While the current status-quo makes forcing the use of plain text clients equivalent to blocking all major internet services, which would be more revolting to the populace.  Big corpos probably know that, and force TLS as an intentional measure against allowing "enemies" to spy on users, and leave the control in big corpo's hands to give the spying data only to "friends".  The use of Cloudflare by half the internet perhaps demonstrates that it is not about privacy, as much as "we only allow the eyes we want to allow".As for smaller internet sites, personal sites, blogs, or archives of scientific knowledge and such, I'm very much in favor of them accepting plain text connections if the user requested explicitly.  Perhaps, a middle ground, to work around the stupid behavior of modern web clients, would be to force TLS on the main site, but then have a mirror of the entire site on a subdomain (notls.mysite.org) that does not force TLS connections.  This can even go for big corpo silos, if they wanted, e.g. notls.facebook.com, but then again they probably won't do that, because they would risk losing the monopoly power they hold over that information.
       
 (DIR) Post #B4KZMfzYtjAHlgSoTI by rozenglass@fedi.dreamscape.link
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @sigmasternchen@comfy.social @SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo I didn't know entire TLDs required TLS before.  Apparently, buy having them in browsers' "HSTS Preloading Lists". This is disgusting.  And .dev at that, which sounds like a domain you might use for a development environment.  But anyway, since clients themselves ship the HSTS lists, that means if you provide plain HTTP it can still be useful to clients that don't use those HSTS preloading lists, and I assume any HTTP-only client will not have such lists.  If the goal is more compatibility, then that should still satisfy.  Of course clients that use HSTS preloading lists will only connect using TLS.  If you want such clients to be able to connect to your mirror without TLS, then getting a secondary domain for the mirror would work, if you so wish.
       
 (DIR) Post #B4ZNGZbJSjce87qNJw by rozenglass@fedi.dreamscape.link
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @aartaka@merveilles.town I haven't dabbled in the math and shorthand stuff, but did switch to analogue for a while, doing a Zettelkasten-like system of my own, using folded A4 paper, with IDs, thread chaining, indexes, linking, etc.  A pencil and a ruler plus the paper were all the tools I used.  I used it for journaling, writing, keeping lists of books, writing reviews and notes, task management, indexing my collections of psychical objects, and other assorted uses.  My verdict is: analogue has definitely been more productive than digital for me.  It is slower in every way, so /speed/ is not how it did it.  It was more through /focus/, friction making switching away from things more expensive, more accurate estimation and prioritization of tasks, and some kind of psychological effect from the meditative effect of preparing the documents, lining the paper manually, and drawing some flourish and some attempts at calligraphy in the titles; having beauty and care imbued into the work; craftsmanship of sorts.  I tried it even on other people, for example helping my wife with a long-term project by dedicating a paper to record her achievements, writing them down very carefully and slowly, with some ornaments around the paper, etc.  It had a very visible effect on her excitement and dedication to get to her goals, and she was always coming back to ask me to write down the next thing she's proud of.  I don't think this effect would be achieved by writing a bullet list in a plain text file.The negatives of analogue are overblown usually.  Most governments ran on paper machines, but too many salesmen wanted to sell us the "Digital Transformation" the past few decades.  Search is not a big issue, because you can have an index, and write keywords in it, backups are not a big issue, because you can scan your documents, copy them, and even OCR them if your writing is acceptably readable, or even manually copy them by hand if the writings are important (every time you manually copy, you have a chance to improve what you wrote; an article re-written from scratch three times is usually of way higher quality than one written once).  Hyper-linking does not require a digital tool; you can have IDs and use them as links, and finding the right document can be fast if you have a good ID schema to sort your documents by.  Even copy-paste works in analogue if you really want, by...  you know, copying with a printer, and then pasting with some glue.  Or just link using IDs.  I use simple nylon plastic sleeves as folders, give folders IDs too, and link to them from an index page that explains what things are in that folder.  Usually the index paper is kept as the first paper in the folder itself, then a link to that index paper is made from a more central index (e.g.  index of personal government documents, index of sentimental letters, gifts, and trinkets, etc.).  Moving paper around is also easy.  Throw it on a scanner, make a copy, put it in your clipboard, and take it with you on a bus ride.  If you want to move an original document from your main data store to some other place (e.g.  from home to office), you can write that down in a special "move index" file, in which such moves are tracked.Another thing I noticed with analogue, is that my brain became better at things, making it faster than using a computer.  For example, it takes me a few minutes to search online maps to make a trip plan to where I wanted to go, but since I'm using analogue instead of digital (I got rid of my phone completely too, by the way) I had to write the directions down on a paper and take it with me, as I couldn't access them on demand whenever I needed them otherwise.  Well, not for long, because my brain suddenly started remembering the roads for next time, whereas I went places dozens of times using digital maps before, and never memorized the roads.  Same for phone numbers, I used family members' numbers hundreds of times using a mobile phone, never memorizing them, but without using a digital contacts manager, I had to write them down, and then I find the paper and read it when I needed to call them using landline, and less than half a dozen times later I was just remembering the phone number off the top of my head.  Much faster than searching any digital tool :DAfter a year or so, I went back to my digital systems to see if the lessons I learned can be helpful there.  I ventured forth implementing my (8th, over the past decade) home-grown digital organization system, in Emacs Lisp, focused on a chunked single plain-text log, with internal linking, tag-based indexing, very fast leader-key-based shortcuts to do everything, etc.  The results so far, around 3 months in, are not very good.  It is much better than any of the seven digital systems that I built before it, and any of the dozen 3rd party digital tools I've tried, but it just doesn't "hit it".  There's something really missing in the digital world.  The faster the tools are, the easier the shortcuts, the lower the friction, the worse it becomes.  The results are measurable reductions in total productivity, even though /it feels/ like I'm faster, and I spend less time organizing and planning, and everything just "emerges" from the system.  Yet, I'm measurably less productive.  I see I lose a lot more time on distractions, small side tracked tiny tasks that hairball into massive time wastes, more likely to not be productive due to not "feeling it"; i.e.  low-energy, lack of excitement about things I want to do, etc.Now, of course, there are like a million confounding factors in those experiments, so I can't really make any absolute judgments.  But I'm starting to build a model that has two distinct approaches to productivity, one focused on improving the tools and workflows, modifying the outside world, and the other on sharpening the mind and mental state, modifying the world within.  Doing analogue things in the real world, because it's slow as heck, because it has friction, because it allows your brain many many free cycles to generate random associations in the background, because you see many things at the same time (try spreading 20 related cards / documents on a big desk or the floor, very hard to simulate what happens there on a computer), because it costs so much time and effort, it all pulls your mind together, gives a fine point to your attention, and a sharp edge to your priorities.Or that's my hypothesis about what happened with me at least.  To learn more, lots of information around Zettelkasten is good food for thought, and I recommend the book Paper Machines by Jacques Derrida, which I found very interesting (though I haven't finished the entire book yet).
       
 (DIR) Post #B4as3uqQSVlhzNJiim by rozenglass@fedi.dreamscape.link
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @merlin@kif.rocks I've been enjoying "no build" systems in my last few projects; write the build process in the language itself, grow custom features as needed.  zero dependencies, all you need is the compiler or runtime of the project's language:cc build.c -o build && ./buildsbcl --script build.lispnode build.jstcc build.ts && node dist/build.js
       
 (DIR) Post #B52WIyEDP2VAGH600W by rozenglass@fedi.dreamscape.link
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @autistics@fedigroups.social @lizzard@social.tchncs.de I find it helpful to sit down with a journal and pen, and write down everything that comes to mind before going to bed.  Sometimes I just jot down things that come to mind, on a slip of paper (try not to use phones near bed at all) without much expansion, as a promise to my mind that I will come back to this later tomorrow, then I visualize myself putting the idea into a book and putting the book into my mind's storage library shelves.  Usually, after I do this, I get /another/ idea or worry, and another, and another, but I keep repeating the same mind ritual, and then 30 ideas later, it slows down, and I usually visualize myself sitting in front of that library and just watching the collection of books.  As the ideas slow down, I try to have a complete void of emptiness in my mind, accompanied with a breathing technique with one simple rule; exhales for longer periods than inhales.  The void keeps getting disrupted again with new ideas, but I go back to put them on the shelves, then void again, as much as I can.  It is some kind of meditation probably of some sorts, but yeah.  After a while, my mind calms down enough that sudden sleep takes over.If something is really sticky and doesn't allow me to put it away, then I try to override it, by basically "daydreaming".  I put myself into a different world, with interesting characters, throw some random events happening, and just explore how the world and the characters evolve in my mind, and how I would interact as someone in that world.  If I'm lucky, the grip of imagination overrides the grip of anxiety, and usually, as I delve more into the world, my mind slowly transitions into the "in-between" state where you're starting to sleep but the imaginary world is playing on its own, and then somehow I wake up the next day.As a last resort, which I prefer not to do a lot, I would play some kind of video that takes a little bit of brain power to understand, but not too much.  Something like a history documentary, or someone playing a classic video game, or some programming stream, or some such.  It captures my mind when I pay attention to it, but then, if the video is low-stakes and "chill" enough, I find myself falling asleep to it.  I tried background noise things, like rain and storms and calming music, they help a bit, but not enough usually to override anxiety, because they require zero brain cycles to consume, unlike a game play-through video for example.A few more random things that have smaller effects: Resolve not to eat for 6+ hours before bed; your only relief in the morning.  If my brain knows it will not have food until the morning, no matter how hungry I feel, I tend to fall asleep better, just to wake up and eat excitedly.  Try sleeping on the floor in a different room, pick your pillow and blanket, and just sleep on the floor, maybe use a carpet or something like that under you if it's too cold / hard, but not a mattress or anything thick.  Sleeping on the floor, in a different room, for some reason helps sometimes, no idea how exactly it tricks my brain.  Raising my feet slightly over some couch or chair, temporarily, while sleeping on the floor helps sometimes, but maybe that's a special case due to being anemic or something.The right environment and body temperature and a comfy bedding help a lot too.  Also, train your mind to know that sleep place is sleep place, i.e.  don't do anything in bed that is not sleep.  And, again, for the love of all that is holy, no phones in bed at all.  Put it in some other room if you can.  If you need the last resort solution of playing a video, then prefer to play it on a laptop or tablet on a side table or something, and lower the brightness, and use some red-shift tool to make screen colors warmer.I hope  you can find  something that helps,and I wish you the serenity of dreams.
       
 (DIR) Post #B57Cr9o1py6eioff04 by rozenglass@fedi.dreamscape.link
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @jascha@ohai.social My personal solution to this, when I want to slow my brain down, is to utilize those rare abilities to get myself intentionally stuck in thought loops, for example, every thought that comes to me, I imagine I put it in a box or book and line it perfectly next to the other boxes and books, and I keep doing that for dozens of times until I start running out of thoughts, at which I start focusing on just staring at those imaginary lined up books or boxes in an imaginary empty room lit only by candles.  I never run out of random thoughts to be fair, and many of them re-appear again and again, but sitting there just repeating those cycles long enough (up to an hour or two sometimes) allows them to slow down a little, and I usually feel better afterwards.  If some thoughts are relevant to my life I may write them in a real notebook or text file to soothe myself into knowing that I won't miss that thing, I'll just come back to it later.This is what works for me, sometimes, each mind is unique so your mileage may vary.
       
 (DIR) Post #B634CifllhYKWNgrrs by rozenglass@fedi.dreamscape.link
       1 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @Zergling_man@sacred.harpy.faith @cjd@pkteerium.xyz so is lvcreate --snapshot if you're okay with the near doubled IOPS temporarily while you take your backup off the mounted consistent snapshot using any normal backup software.
       
 (DIR) Post #B6d7IFXgHXm1SunEKu by rozenglass@fedi.dreamscape.link
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @wolf480pl@mstdn.io Indeed.  Sadly, wanting simple decentralized things that compose through generic interfaces is an acquired taste, and seems to be a relatively rare one at that.  I think most people think in terms of "solutions", they have a problem or need, they want a single solution with easy instructions to follow, the more parts the solution is made of, more alternatives that exist, more exceptions and weird edge cases they have to understand, more steps of instructions they have to follow, it's all just more cognitive load they have to spend to solve their problem, and that is of course a "Very Bad Thing".  The other mindset is very different, thinks in terms of skills and tools, giving such people an "integrated solution" with "step-by-step" instructions is a /loss/ in their minds, because in their own eyes, they just learned less, were kept in the dark, earned less skill, and seeded control to the generally suspect class of "Those Who Know".  To have alternative tools is a positive thing, to learn the exceptions and the edge cases is pleasant, to experiment with combining the tools they earned in crafty creative ways is one of the most positive experiences they may have.  Some may say that we all are both types of people, depending on the domains of interest, and there is perhaps truth to that, but I strongly feel that this difference is more essential, and is not just limited to their subjects of interest: the craftsman's mindset seems to have a natural /negative weight/ to having to deal with some life domains using the "solutions" mindset, they don't like things abstracted away from them; they would rather learn the tools and skills needed to heal themselves or their loved ones, to construct their homes, to build their cars, to design their own electronics, to grow their food, etc.  They only reluctantly choose not to do that, due to the very regrettable lack of time and resources associated with being human, while the first "solution" type thinks of every tool they don't have to learn, and every skill they don't have to practice, as a good win; given the choice, they would rather abstract most things away.  If infinite time and resource were given to type-2, they would learn every tool earn every skill, and open every black-box, but if the same happened to type-1 They will want to not have to deal with any problems, or learn anything, beyond some limited set of personally significant interests, perhaps, and would rather everything be in neat little black-boxes, never ever needing to be opened.