blightbow

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 11 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Honestly, no. People are pretty bad at filtering for Unicode alternative characters. It can be worked around when the site admins understand what's going on, but...have fun skimming all of the Unicode code pages for every possible lookalike character.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

The headline undersells the outcome by a lot.

As part of the judgment by the US District Court of Rhode Island, Tropic Haze was issued with a permanent injunction preventing it from offering or marketing Yuzu or any of its source code in the future.

Its members are also prevented from creating any future software that circumvents Nintendo’s technical protection, and Tropic Haze must surrender all website domains and information related to its emulator.

Ownership of all related websites and domains must be turned over, and the developers are barred from further participation in "creating any future software that circumvents Nintendo's technical protection".

The wording of the actual settlement will be key here, which we are unlikely to ever see. At a minimum it puts significant controls on how the individual developers can interact with the Nintendo emulation community, if not outright prevents them from contributing code to most Nintendo based emulators. It almost certainly increases their individual liabilities if they are caught assisting such a project again, as they will be forced defend how their contributions don't violate the settlement. And that's just to avoid stiffer penalties being thrown at them.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The title of that article does not support its conclusion. Lazy pasting what I commented the last time I saw this.

Nothing has changed for LTS at all. Scroll down to the pretty graphs on https://ubuntu.com/about/release-cycle, and pay particular attention to how the ratio of orange to purple on the LTS graphs has changed over time. (it hasn't) The base LTS support window has always been 5 years, and the extended window has always been another 5 years.

What they did add was additional security updates for Universe packages, which are represented by the black line. Note that this black line is independent of the LTS coverage. From https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/ubuntu-pro-faq/34042:

Your Ubuntu LTS is still secured in exactly the same way it has always been, with five years of free security updates for the ‘main’ packages in the distribution, and best-effort security coverage for everything else. This has been the promise of Ubuntu since our first LTS in 2006, and remains exactly the same. In fact, thanks to our expanded security team, your LTS is better secured today than ever before, even without Ubuntu Pro.

Ubuntu Pro is an additional stream of security updates and packages that meet compliance requirements such as FIPS or HIPAA, on top of an Ubuntu LTS. Ubuntu Pro was launched in public beta on 5 October, 2022, and moved to general availability on 26 January, 2023. Ubuntu Pro provides an SLA for security fixes for the entire distribution (‘main and universe’ packages) for ten years, with extensions for industrial use cases.

You can also dig into this AskUbuntu answer for even more details, but the long and short of it is this has no impact on Ubuntu LTS whatsoever. Keep using it if that is your thing. Keep using something else if it is not.

This old news will become newsworthy if Canonical starts shifting packages out of the main repo and into universe, which would in fact reduce the security update coverage of LTS releases. That said, the article has not asserted any evidence of this. Nothing to see here...for now.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago

It is not. The headline is completely inaccurate.

Nothing has changed for LTS at all. Scroll down to the pretty graphs on https://ubuntu.com/about/release-cycle, and pay particular attention to how the ratio of orange to purple on the LTS graphs has changed over time. (it hasn't) The base LTS support window has always been 5 years, and the extended window has always been another 5 years.

What they did add was additional security updates for Universe packages, which are represented by the black line. Note that this black line is independent of the LTS coverage. From https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/ubuntu-pro-faq/34042:

Your Ubuntu LTS is still secured in exactly the same way it has always been, with five years of free security updates for the ‘main’ packages in the distribution, and best-effort security coverage for everything else. This has been the promise of Ubuntu since our first LTS in 2006, and remains exactly the same. In fact, thanks to our expanded security team, your LTS is better secured today than ever before, even without Ubuntu Pro.

Ubuntu Pro is an additional stream of security updates and packages that meet compliance requirements such as FIPS or HIPAA, on top of an Ubuntu LTS. Ubuntu Pro was launched in public beta on 5 October, 2022, and moved to general availability on 26 January, 2023. Ubuntu Pro provides an SLA for security fixes for the entire distribution (‘main and universe’ packages) for ten years, with extensions for industrial use cases.

You can also dig into this AskUbuntu answer for even more details, but the long and short of it is this has no impact on Ubuntu LTS whatsoever. Keep using it if that is your thing. Keep using something else if it is not.

Edit: This old news will become newsworthy if Canonical starts shifting packages out of the main repo and into universe, which would in fact reduce the security update coverage of LTS releases. That said, the article has not asserted any evidence of this. Nothing to see here...for now.

 
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

This is where the argument for unconditionally providing equal air time to bad faith arguments falls apart, and where paradox of tolerance comes into play. One side demands tolerance for itself but argues in bad faith, and the other is inclined toward tolerance with others because it's what they would want for themselves. The latter is taken advantage of because the former does not return the favor.

The key to solving for the paradox is recognizing that there is a difference of scale:

  1. If one ideology demands tolerance for itself but is intolerant of all ideologies aside from its own, its intolerance is broadly scoped. There is more intolerance in play than tolerance.
  2. If one ideology grants tolerance to other ideologies except when their own is denied the same, then the intolerance is narrowly scoped. Intolerance is still in play, but it is a false inference to imply that those who champion equality must unconditionally surrender it to those who do not believe in it.

Pay attention to how many ideologies a school of thought is trying to silence and who their allies are. Unreasonable extremists can be found in all camps and their existence alone does not prove a movement's bad faith or your own righteousness. Reasonable people should exist, making it more important to focus on the goals of the movement and how its better stewards comport themselves. Remember that people who open their discussions with rudeness and toxicity are compensating for the insecurity of their debating point and already betraying their own intolerance. They aren't worth engaging with.

  • Who are the patient and reasonable people that are standing up for an ideology?
  • Does a leader for a movement rely on emotional appeals to unrelenting anger? Are they always angry and rude in a public setting, and primarily trying to appeal to those who behave in a similar way? Ignore their spiel and use someone else as your benchmark. (edit: But if this is the best they can offer and the leaders who are most frequently pushed to the top, this should be seen as a large red flag.)
  • What happens when you try to engage in a conversation with the patient ones? Do they keep a level head and respectfully agree to disagree with you while happily trading points, or do they go on the attack with ad-hominems when you patiently poke at the holes in their arguments?

At the end of the day there aren't any simple solutions and you're left with a critical thinking exercise that only works for you. Be one of the patient people who is a good advocate for your cause, but do not allow yourself to invest a disproportionate amount of effort engaging with someone who does not return respect. Seek out those who return that respect, regardless of their stated ideology, and you will both be better for it when the conversation is done. And hopefully the result of those conversations will help other people make up their mind about who is truly acting in bad faith.


Yeah this is a memes community, but it's something that I've been thinking about for a while. Feel free to quote/link/whatever.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

I won't deny it, at least one third of my motivation for making this post was to deliver that diss.

(the other two thirds are split between Chad deserving the recognition, and doing my part to make this place more attractive than Reddit)

 

Almost 15 years ago. Not my MC, but I worked at the same company for several years leading into it. None of the glory is mine, and I am not any of the named or fired characters in this story.

The setup needs some backstory for the MC to fully marinate, so bear with me for a moment. Tl;dr at the end.


Cast of Characters:

  • Mr. Wheatley: VP of Technology. The protagonist, at least in his eyes.
  • Lamprey: ~~Lead Developer~~ ~~Career Backstabber~~ Director of IT at time of MC, and sycophant attached to Mr. Wheatley
  • Bottom: ~~Director of IT~~ ~~Manager of Systems~~ Guy who gets demoted every time Lamprey or Wheatley's knives need sharpening. He stubbornly refuses to quit despite the messages being sent, which is why he earns this moniker despite my like for the guy.
  • Chad: Originally our phone guy. Dispenser of MC who enters late into the story.
  • Chadette: A floor manager. Single mom with cancer and two sons that she struggles to provide for.

I once worked IT for a callcenter selling a morally questionable study product. The scam isn't obvious when you're interviewing for the position, but once you start walking the halls long enough people start talking and you learn what's really going on. The company has changed its name and product several times for legal reasons since I left, a fact well-known to us worker bees helping our later employers verify that the shithole company listed in our work history actually existed at some point.

In addition to the questionable nature of the product, the company itself was basically a bingo card for corporate corruption. Shipping department pocketing the difference between standard and expedited shipping if the customer requested expedited and was within a certain mileage of the package carrier? Check. President knocking up his executive assistant behind his wife's back? Check. Friends of that executive assistant being given casual walks around the block while being told to keep their faceholes shut about what they know? Check, and probably because the CEO is the wife of the President. Oops?

It was in this environment that the protagonist enters the story. We shall call him "Wheatley". Wheatley is an IT enthusiast (particular emphasis on this word) and stakeholder in the company who had recently returned from setting up a chemical plant in a country known for its lax safety standards. For reasons unknown to us worker bees, Wheatley had decided that he wanted a position of leadership over the IT department. The powers that be granted his wish, inserting a "VP of Technology" above the Director of IT.

  • Bottom is the Director of IT. Intelligent, but occasionally pensive and nervous when pressured. Despite these tendencies, he will usually stand up for what he feels is the decision with the most objective merit. Poor guy never stood a chance.

  • Wheatley has a doctorate. Some of you working under douchebags probably know where this is going already. Wheatley wanted everyone to know that he had this doctorate, as evidenced by his insistence in correcting any employee who did not address him as "Dr. Wheatley". He will be henceforth referred to in this post as Mr. Wheatley. Mr. Wheatley is an abusive narcissist who is convinced that he is a comedian and knows technology better than the people reporting up to him. His standard joke is to scrutinize the opinions of employees multiple rungs beneath him and joke about firing them. These "jokes" are always given a halfway serious delivery that communicates to the target that he is in fact halfway serious and could have them defenestrated if the mood suited him. He has an unhappy marriage and occasionally unleashes his scowling daughter on the mostly empty cube farm where IT resides, whereupon she crayons on those cube walls in a desperate bid for attention from the father who is too busy palling around with the executives upstairs or making a nuisance of himself in front of the worker bees who would rather be spending time on their actual jobs.

  • Lamprey is the lead developer and began palling around with Mr. Wheatley during a transition between buildings. When we arrived for our first day at the new location, we learned that 1) Bottom had been demoted into "Manager of Systems" (a role created specifically for his demotion) and 2) Lamprey had been given the Director title in his place. Questionable, but okay.

So begins their reign of terror.


In his new role, Lamprey is a standard issue IT egoist who knows a few things and has let this get to his head. This self-assuredness is what won him a seat at the table of Mr. Wheatley. He does not like having his authority questioned, regardless of the merits involved in the opposing arguments, and will ensure that a disciplinary slip lands in your HR folder the next day if you fail to follow his direction on implementing something to the letter. (warnings? what are those?)

Chad is hired around this time. He was brought into the systems team to help wrestle with the phone system, but also dabbles with Linux in his spare time. He is not an actual Linux guy and makes sure people know this. For reasons unknown to Chad, Mr. Wheatley immediately takes a shine to him. It's probably because Chad has a good sense of humor, but also because he's not as worn down as the other worker bees and able to keep a smile on his face while laughing at Mr. Wheatley's shitty jokes, all the while hating his guts just as much as the rest of us.

A few months pass. Chad strikes up a relationship with Chadette, a single mom with cancer struggling to provide for her two sons. They are both cool people and this was a genuinely awesome thing. This was, unfortunately, one of the few high notes that year for their mutual work friends.

  • One of the two guys in helpdesk who everyone knew had a baby on the way gets laid off with no notice.
  • Disciplinary slips continue to fly on a whim, including to an employee who worked a night of unbilled overtime at his own discretion to try and make a solution work after Lamprey decided that he didn't want any more time being spent on it. (incidentally missing a call from a friend who committed suicide that night)

Needless to say, morale in the IT department is at an all-time low. So what does Mr. Wheatley decide to do out of nowhere? Demote Bottom again! Chad is stunned with disbelief when he (the phone guy!!) is promoted to manager over Bottom and the Linux admins, who he previously reported to. Bottom is no longer a manager at all, and his direct colleagues are people who have been with the company prior to the VP of Technology role even existing. He stubbornly refuses to quit despite this, but this is the last straw for some of his colleagues and they bail out of respect for him even if he is unwilling (or unable?) to do so for his own pride.


The MC

Chadette is still fighting against cancer, and some days are much worse than others. Chad had started living with her recently, and occasionally comes into work late because he is helping to get her sons to school.

For this next part, it's important to understand that most IT employees enter the building through a side entrance that is closest to the server room. It is immediately adjacent to a stairwell, and only leadership and IT have access to badge through the door. For this reason it is generally a low traffic area.

One day, Chad arrives late from dropping off Chadette's sons and finds Mr. Wheatley standing on the other side of the door waiting for him. It is very deliberate. It is at this point that he drops a quip that is stunning, even with his well-entrenched reputation for being a shiteater.

"You know, at some point, you really need to think about what is more important..."

Chad is stunned into silence with disbelief for a moment. Did he hear that correctly? He knows that Mr. Wheatley is aware of the extenuating circumstances, so is it actually possible that he just said that out loud? It takes a moment to process, but Chad was given his name for a reason in this story, and he has balls of steel.

"OK"

Chad turns right back around, walks back to his car, and drives home. Message received, motherfucker.

When Chad doesn't show up to work the next day, it probably begins to sink in with Mr. Wheatley the extent to which he just fucked up. Particularly since the only person who is good at wrangling the phone system has ditched -- arguably the most important person in callcenter ops. To his credit (unless it was because something broke), he waits two weeks before he finally gives Chad a call on his cell. Wheatley plays it cool with Chad and starts with making small talk, completely ignoring the elephant in the room. Everyone is cordial. Once Mr. Wheatley has a good sense for the temperature and determines that hands are not going to emerge from his phone and repeatedly slam his face into a wall, he finally broaches his main reason for calling.

"So, when do you think you're coming back to the office?"

Chad could get justifiably quite angry here, but he's already thought this through ahead of time.

"That was my notice." click

A few months later, I'm hanging out with Chad and Chadette at their house and this story is relayed to me over showing him BlazBlue multiplayer on PS3. They were awesome people who deserved each other, and I couldn't be more proud of how he chose her over one of the biggest workplace douchebags I've ever had the displeasure of encountering.

Bottom finally quit sometime after this if I have my timeline straight. Poor Bottom. :( Eventually there was a near full turnover of everyone who had been in the IT department since before Mr. Wheatley joined the company, and he got grilled for it. Lamprey was still there because, well, he's a goddamn lamprey.


tl;dr

IT "enthusiast" with partial ownership in company has a VP position created for himself over IT department, erects a hegemony of asskissing around himself, demotes a director twice until he is no longer a manager at all, lays off an employee expecting a baby with no notice. Douche canoe finally gets his comeuppance when the most vital ops employee quits without notice after being told to choose between work and his girlfriend with two sons and cancer. Eventually there is a full turnover of IT, minus the sycophant who got promoted for his asskissing. Get fucked, Mr. Wheatley.

Edits: Neglected to mention that there had been a full turnover of IT under Mr. Wheatley's watch, minus Lamprey. Age of Blazblue on PS3 used to better approximate when this happened. Importance of MC wielder's job function.