The bounce yesterday was actually the dumbest thing ever. It’s crazy that a tweet from a nobody can literally pump/dump the entire stock market these days. Everyone’s fear/greed switch is on a hair-trigger (probably actually due to bot traders).

Edit: and now today he completely reversed the messaging and caused the same rally again.

To be fair, the “value” has been dubious for years. Everything was/is propped up on the mag 7, and all their promises are built on hypothetical tech, enshittification, and unsustainable business practices. The greed was/is waaay overextended.

The best part is, Trump is literally doing everything he said he was going to do without any deviation. All you had to do was listen to what he was saying he would do, and you would have known where we would end up.

So you shouldn’t be questioning Trump’s choices as much as questioning yourself for not knowing what they would be.

Next step is, “Why should we stop at people who have been convicted of their crimes?”

The thing I’ve been wondering about is, to what extent will they try quantitative easing and/or bailouts, as was the 2008 strategy. I don’t think trump will endorse QE, but I think it’s possible the establishment of the crypto reserve is so he can bail out his buddies. But instead of saying “I’m bailing out these billionaires” which wouldn’t play well with his base, he’ll say “I’m using USD reserves to diversify investments into crypto”. Which pumps whatever coin he chooses, after which all his buddies dump on the taxpayers.

Good example. Hard to say if any of this rational will ever apply, though. I just expect him to either ignore anything a court says, or push it to the supreme court where the president is above the law.

IANAL, but I assume lawyers are always looking for any precedent.

If someone claims someone else scammed them (in a civil or criminal case), they’re going to appeal to past similar cases. The civil case might even depend on the outcome of a criminal case against the same person. If they’re actually found not-guilty in a criminal case, then a civil case probably isn’t going to go anywhere. So if trump can convince a civil class action lawsuit to settle because it looks like they won’t win, then he can just pocket the difference.

All of this is my own conjecture as I see it, not to be considered factual.

I just don’t know why that seems to include someone like Hawk Tuah girl.

I think Trump is eventually going to make the same argument she does, “I didn’t know the the people I was working with were professional crypto grifters. I don’t know anything about crypto, I’m one of the victims here (who happened to also make out like a bandit). They just said it would be good for the ecosystem, and we would make some profit from the value we created.”

I have to assume all these crypto pardons are his team of lawyers trying to limit any precedent for inevitible lawsuits brought by people who lost money through TRUMP coin, once they’ve become disillusioned with the man. That, or he’s buying favors from people willing to do crimes.

This is apparently a fake tweet. An archive of the actual tweet corresponding to that datetime is here.

Thanks for the followup, I found a couple of plasma-wayland packages (I forget if they were through apt or the software center, and i don’t know what the difference is) and tried them out. One of them I’m not sure what it added, but the other did seem to create the necessary file for my partner’s launcher to use plasma wayland. I don’t know if it’s a mint thing, but we always had to do a full reboot between using wayland and x11 window managers; if you just log out and choose the other, stuff would be borked.

I want to see him pick a female soldier at random, go 1-on-1 with her in melee combat, get his ass kicked, and repeat until he gets the message.

So, I guess this means smart, ethical, and charismatic. I feel like this is one of those cases where I get to pick two one of those traits, and it has to be charismatic.

That seems to accurately describe where we find ourselves. To quote Men in Black, “A person is smart, people are dumb.”

I think we don’t get out of this situation by thinking real hard and convincing people to vote based on a theoretical future; people will only change their behaviour in the face of an actual failure. I’m not a historian, but I have to assume the appeal of fascism was alive and well in the US during the great depression. We just had the opportunity to learn from Germany and Italy’s mistakes before we went down the same road. Now WE are the example that will hopefully sway other countries’ democratic behaviors.

Ex. the conservative party was heavily favored to win the Canadian election after Trudeau stepped down, but ever since Trump took office, the polls have completely reversed. Still unclear where it will land, but I think Canada’s voters are getting that much needed opportunity to learn from our failures.

I feel like this question is as useful as asking “when is it ok to downvote someone?” You can theorize about how a downvote should only be used when someone is not contributing to the discussion honestly, and how you should never downvote someone just because you disagree with them…but at the end of the day, people are gonna downvote others for whatever random reason they feel like.

Similarly, is it useful to ask what a vote “means” in a democracy? Or is it a waste of time to try and apply reason to, or derive reason from, the behavior of a hivemind? Unlike individuals who can learn from hypothetical failures, I personally believe hiveminds (groups/societies/whatever word you’d like to use) can only learn from actual failures.

The people could elect a perfect model citizen who will represent the people’s best interests, but if what’s best for the people in the long term comes with too much discomfort in the near term, the people will happily vote against their own interests.

It did really take off about 5 years ago.

It’s neat that this exists, but not neat if someone hosts it for a year, a bunch of fed users rely on it and share a bunch of links using it, and then the hoster takes it down for whatever reason, and now there are a bunch of dead links littered all over the place.

Even less neat if some malicious group can then buy the lapsed domain and forward all those dead links to ads and viruses.

Please host responsibly, is all I’m saying.

I would go a step further and say that any time one of these MAC systems has to resort to user interaction to do its job, it’s a straight up failure case: the system simply didn’t have enough information to do its job, ended up doing no better than a blanket “block everything” config, and is asking the user to do 100% of the heavy lifting of determining what should happen.

So, when I hear

If someone is lazy or not knowledgeable enough to make the right decision…No automated system can protect [them].

I hear: “every access control system is fundamentally broken”. Which is fine, maybe that’s true, there’s a reason social engineering is so useful. So then all these systems should prioritize streamlining that failure case as much as possible: Tell the user what is accessing what, when, how, and then make it trivial to temporarily (with well defined limits), permanently, (or even volatile-y using CoW/containerization/overlay fs) grant or deny access as quickly and easily as possible.

Every other system you’re comparing SELinux, AFAIK, handles this case better, which is why users tend to prefer them.

For the record, I’m not arguing that SELinux is bad at the actual access control part, I’m only answering why people don’t like using it, which is how it handles the failure case part. Now it’s been a while since I’ve used SELinux and I’ve never used setroubleshooter, but if you tell me it actually streamlines all of this to be smoother than every other tool, then I’ll install it tonight!

How do you know when you’re letting through a valid access, an unnecessary one that could be a vulnerability, and an actively malicious one?

I don’t think anyone is saying throw out all access control, they’re just saying SELinux adds too much unproductive friction for everyday usage. You said it takes 15m to troubleshoot. But that’s not a one time thing, that’s 15m that scales with the amount of new programs and updates you’re running. And 90% of people aren’t even going to be able to tell they’re looking at a malicious access if they’re in the habit of always working around blocks that show up.

Ah that’s fair, I didn’t look closely

“Open carry prohibited, concealed carry without a permit” is Chaotic Evil energy.