themachine

@themachine@lemmy.world

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. For a complete list of posts, browse on the original instance.

themachine ,

I prefer restic for my backups. There's nothing inherently wrong with just making a copy if that is sufficient for you though. Restic will create small point in time snapshots as compared to just a file copy so I'm the event that perhaps you made a mistake and accidentally deleted something from the "live" copy and managed to propagate that to your backup it is a nonissue as you could simply restore from a previous snapshot.

These snapshots can also be compressed and deduplicated making them extremely space efficient.

If a useful brain-computer interface was available sometimes in your lifetime (and secure and safe) would you get one?

Background to this slightly weird question: I found one of my old an English exams on science fiction and dystopian literature from the 11th grade in North-Rhine Westphalia, Germany (ca. 2004) and found a similar question. The idea back then was to discuss the pro- and cons of a BCI (and I objectively did not do to well back...

themachine ,

Assuming the implementation is done in such a way that I am not indirectly owned by the manufacturer of the BCI and am capable of maintaining its software and firmware myself...yes yes absolutely yes stick that shit in my head.

But if it is not open source and I'm expected to be tied to some corporate entity just to utililze it, no, absolutely not.

themachine ,

Yeah thats mostly the one that keeps me going.

themachine ,

Just look at the bit rate of what you are streaming and multiply it by 3 then add a little extra for overhead.

HDD spins but OS doesnt see mountable disk

The primary OS for this disk was Unraid. Its formated in BTRFS. I don't think either of those matter. The disk spins and worked before the reboot. But now. No matter what machine, port or cable I use its not mountable. Is there anything I can try? I was going to attempt Spinrite on it however it doesn't see anything either....

themachine ,

What exactly do you mean by "not mountable"?

What is the ideology behind private trackers?

Private trackers are well known for their elitist and insufferable users. I'd like to know the reasons behind their gatekeeping. Is it just mere elitism to feel superior or are there any other reasons? I've heard people saying they like to have a smaller number of high quality users for long term stability. I've even heard...

themachine ,

Are you asking about why private trackers are private or are you asking about why a handful of people were mean to you who also happened to use a private tracker?

Edit: typo

themachine ,

The primary reason a private track is private is to make it feasible to maintain a curated community. Many users are not good torrent citizens. Many users are not good netizens in the first place. More than a few will look to actively do harm. Keeping a mostly closed community allows the vetting of users and those who end up breaking the rules are dealt with swiftly.

The extra barrier of entry also helps prevent bad actors from operating on the site. This is of course not a full proof thing but it is obviously much better than a public site.

Additionally running a private tracker and site takes server resources that are not free. Limiting the total number of users is a way of maintaining uptime by staying within your operational limits.

I'm sure there are other benefits for private trackers but these are at least a few.

I am not going to explain why someone on the internet was mean to you. Given the tone of this post I wouldn't be surprised if it was deserved.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • test
  • worldmews
  • mews
  • All magazines