Great American humorist. C# developer. Open source enthusiast.

XMPP: wagesj45@chat.thebreadsticks.com
Mastodon: wagesj45@mastodon.jordanwages.com
Blog: jordanwages.com

  • 1 Post
  • 68 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle

  • This is important. I dunno about scale, but backups. I started out hosting a chat room on a raspberry pi. It was a fun side project. But then, that became where my friends all hung out. That was the place, so it became important to me. And then the SD card got corrupted. I then moved on to a consumer laptop. It was way more stable, much faster. But if I messed up anything about the installation, I was hosed.

    I very highly suggest using Proxmox, like you say, and setting up automatic backups. And occasionally transfer them to a hard drive. It doesn’t matter what kind of virtual CPUs or services you install, gedaliyah@lemmy.world, as long as you have a plan for when something you host becomes important to you and you lose it.





  • Do you actually figure that the remainder of the military which doesn’t turn traitor is gonna be outnumbered by the seceding traitors in this civil war scenario?

    Not at all.

    Did you also account for the metric fuckton of able bodied people who would enlist during an open war to stomp out Fascism at home in the open like that?

    I’m sure there would a lot more than fascists willing to actually fight.

    It would absolutely lead to much blood shed on both sides.

    That was my actual point. Not that New Texas has any chance of actually winning.


  • wagesj45@kbin.socialtoFunny@sh.itjust.worksWords fail me
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    You’re probably right, and I used overly broad language. I’m sure there would be targeted strikes. But any strike against infrastructure would be what I would consider a Big Deal™. Everything is so interconnected now that taking out the power grid, for example, would wreak havoc on all the innocent civilians in the area. Just look at how shit hit the fan when Texas lost power in the winter.

    I just think it would be a much more complicated situation than either argument of “we have all the guns, libruls” or “we have Predator drones, conservatard”. I’m used to conservatives making stupid arguments. It bothers me more when I see my side do it.

    But hey, maybe I’m the idiot and it would all work out with targeted strikes. That’s why I’m just some guy on the internet and not a general in the Army or whatever.


  • Anything is possible I guess, even if I personally wouldn’t bet money on it. Then again I’m just a guy and no one in power is gonna ask my opinion. They very well may surprise me and bomb Jethrow’s compound or downtown Houston.

    My original flippant response was triggered from the ease with which people think the US military is some unstoppable force and the Republicans that do this nonsense would easily be put down. I think it is a lot more complicated than that and no course of action would be easy and painless. That’s wishful thinking on behalf of us lefties.



  • And things have changed quite a bit since the civil war. We have a very interconnected country and world. Airplanes exist now. Nuclear submarines and cruise missiles. The destructive power of our weapons has increased ten fold. And we have instant access to 24/7 new media. I don’t think we have the appetite for such a thing in this day and age. Not to mention how any number of hostile nations would be foaming at the mouth looking forward to us having our guard down.


  • wagesj45@kbin.socialtoFunny@sh.itjust.worksWords fail me
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    I’m saying that if you rely on having F-16 fighter jets and drones dropping bombs, you’re arguing for wholesale destruction. If you don’t rely on fighter jets and bombing raids, that means you’re fighting a ground war against insurgents that are more or less equally armed, assuming they have weapons like AR-15s.

    My point is that cruise missiles don’t solve every problem; namely armed local insurgencies. What kind of third use-of-force scenario are you imagining?



  • wagesj45@kbin.socialtoFunny@sh.itjust.worksWords fail me
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    9 months ago

    Which is exactly why the US isn’t going to carpet bomb their own territory. One, ruling over a rubble-laden wasteland isn’t very appealing. Destroying your own infrastructure isn’t good for GDP. Two, soldiers are going to have a lot harder time bombing their own homeland, regardless of how well trained they are.








  • Death threats too?

    Criminal threats are typically actionable. They indicate a concrete act is intended.

    Shouting fire in a crowded theater?

    A famously incorrect example of unprotected speech. It actually is protected speech, it’s just a catchy phrase that people never seem to look into beyond a surface level.

    it’s unfathomable to me that anyone would defend it

    Because at least half of the country I live in would love nothing more to apply these same ideas of restricting the flow of ideas and speech to me. To their mind, my liberal lefty atheistic ideals are diametrically opposed to their world view. To their understanding of the world, I’m actively making the world a worse place just by being in it. I have actively benefited from the freedom of thought and speech that I support while growing up in a deep red and deeply religious small town.

    What you should be asking yourself is why these abhorrent ideas get any traction at all. The public square should be filled with good ideas. Put your ideas out for how to make society better. Put out your critique and world view. The speech you hate so much should be drowned out by all the good speech. The fact that it’s not, and has garnered any sort of appeal points to a failure on society’s part, writ large. We have an obligation to push society forward and be proactive in guiding society where we want it to go. Like I said in another comment, the hearts of men can’t be legislated away; they have to be won.

    We clearly have different philosophies on the value of freedom of thought. I don’t think we’re going to get anywhere with this.