If youtube was a Russian owned site hosting videos on US protests the US government would accuse it of 'sowing discord' and shut it down without controversy.
Now suppose Russia already has a history of meddling in US internal affairs and funding coups within the US, will Russian youtube with videos on US protests be really even allowed to operate here? Would anyone here even be making arguments about democracy, freedom and enlightenment?
There is always a kind of dissonance and double standards in these discussions. You can't let the harassment and persecution of whistle blowers like Assange, Snowden, Manning, the protestors at Standing Rock and immigrant activists and other brazen attacks on democracy go unchallenged and then claim to be 'concerned' about democracy in far off Russia or China. That is politics, not concern for values.
These values if they are to have any meaning can only apply to actions not actors, and using them to to demonize some and excuse others renders them meaningless, and in many ways this has already happened with the widespread abuse of human rights and democracy by some to achieve other objectives.
LXC is daemonless, there is no process hanging around after the container start, so it starts the container and uses any privileges required to setup things like networking, mounts etc and then drops privileges.
LXC had unprivileged container support since 2013 so that part is fairly mature now. 'Unprivileged' in this case means the container process itself is running as a normal user.
LXC does have a container manager though, which is a single process that stays alive for the life of a single container. Within runc (the runtime Docker uses), we don't have a container manager but the downside is that now the upper level needs to keep alive the descriptors and other kernel objects that allow for safe container management by the runtime.
[I maintain runc, and collaborate with the LXC folks.]
This comes across as click bait. This is not the opinion of an actual warehouse worker but someone with an agenda who has taken the job specifically for that purpose which only becomes clear once you click through to read the article. What value can this have? How can this be taken seriously?
Let Amazon workers fight for their rights, why are outsiders who do not do that work skeptical of their concerns? What is the basis?
We are always talking about free speech, democracy and protest and yet it seems when people use these rights a whole group of prosperous and well off individuals who don't have anything to do the conditions of the protestors rush to trivialize and dismiss their concerns. There is something extremely mean and smallminded about this.
This 'resistance to change' catchall argument puts everything beyond criticism, and it can be used/abused in every case of criticism. It seeks to reframe 'change' from a neutral word - change can be good or bad - to a positive instead of focusing on the specifics.
Anyone making this argument should be prepared to to accept every single criticism they make in their life moving forward can be framed as 'their resistance to change'.
This kind of personalization of specific criticism is disingenuous and political and has usually been used
as a PR strategy to push through unpopular decisions. Better to respond to specific criticisms than reach for a generic emotional argument that seeks to delegitimize scrutiny and criticism.
True, but this was not “specific criticism”. It was a general dismissing criticism without details, and so can be refuted with a similarly detail-less answer. A detailed criticism deserves a reasoned and detailed answer, but vague criticism gets a generic rebuttal.
At the moment things like youtube, twitter have become culture and 'technical solutions' to both unrestrained greed, surveillance and this rich fabric of human communication seem to miss the big picture of their cultural value.
The value of these platforms are not technical, they are entirely from the human element and everybody should be able to participate without opening themselves to surveillance and abuse.
Like everything else to run a civilized society we need laws and its unfortunate that this basic first principle of organizing human society needs to be reiterated and debated right untill 2019 because of propaganda by Koch brothers and their ilk on a self serving libertarianism which is as fantastic as a disneyland version of reality.
Privacy in an individual context is irrelevant and only leads to folks glibly claiming they don't care about their privacy. Its like saying I personally doesn't care about the environment. That context and framing is wrong and misleading.
Privacy has a value on a one to one basis. That's why no one is going to give you their phone, yet they will make dissonant statements online. And privacy has a far higher value on a societal basis for a democratic society.
Surveillance capitalism is anti-democratic, hugely abusive and solely for the profit of a few. These are bad actors. That's why societal rule of law needs to kick in but as we know money and greed creates its own logic so that may take time. And till then there will be no shortage of apologists with a vested interest in surveillance trying to 'normalize' it.
Running Ubuntu 16.04 on a Zenbook UX360 with a 4K screen and frankly its working much better than expected. The 4K display is automatically scaled, all the brightness and function buttons work, no issues with display drivers, wifi, bluetooth, suspend and it pretty surprising to see this kind of experience out of the box. And its really fast and smooth. Even battery life is good if not excellent, around 8 hours on windows and 7 on Ubuntu for browsing, youtube, some spreadsheets and terminal.
For those of us who have tried to get Linux working on laptops 5-10 years ago this is quite a jump so clearly people have been working on this in the background to get to this state. Was using WSL earlier but after Ubuntu worked so well may as well use it. Of course for those who use Windows only apps WSL remains a good option.
Also have an Matebook 13 and tried Ubuntu after this experience on the Zenbook and there too it worked out of the box on a hi-res screen with dual graphics but you need to use either the prime drivers to use both, or use bbswitch to put off the Nvidia card for the best battery life. So it seems for recent laptops Linux works pretty well out of the box.
A lot of assertions here about waste management and relative harmlessness of landfills.
Do you have experience or exposure to the recycling, waste management and landfill industry that you can share? Have you spoken to any landfill managers, have some idea of the volume of plastic waste and the landfill industry? Or is this just speaking from the gut?
Most articles have experts[1] and researchers[2] expressing grave concern about waste and microplastics from landfills seeping into the environment and polluting animal ecosystems and even our own water and food supply that would give anyone cause for concern. Positioning that concern as 'negative emotional reactions' without providing any science or evidence about why it is so seems unscientific in the realm of wishful thinking.
The Tali landfill in the second link must be very old. It seems they designed it to drain directly into the river. That's definitely not how a modern landfill is designed, and not just because of plastics.
Wikipedia seems to suggest the landfill was known as "Talinhuippu" and claims it was in use 1963–1979.
No, they're just repeating libertarian propaganda.
Libertarians hate recycling, the Dvorak keyboard and climate change because they are all popular examples of market failures.
So they've attacked them all for decades and now most American nerds will pipe up with "actually, it turns out..." and spew a bunch of lies if you bring up any of these topics and feel all pleased with themselves that they're not getting suckered like all the sheeple who believe in climate science.
It's actually got to the point were libertarian "journalists" are openly admitting that they intentio ally lied about climate change for 20 years because they didn't like the political implications.
Depressingly they're not saying this through any sense of guilt but rather a calculation that they can continue to have more influence by partially admitting but still downplaying climate change rather than blank denial.
Whenever it comes to issues of environmental concern there is always an 'authoritative' comment hand waving away objections and pretending to be on the side of 'science' but offering no scientific evidence, rationale or reasoning.
The entire comment essentially says 'nothing to see here' and positions any concern as 'unscientific' and overreaction.
You see this on HN every time in cases of nuclear power and the environment externalities. This may benefit people who make money from it but no one else and actively derails discussion and environmental concerns.
This is another instance of market failure with the mantra of 'freedom', self regulation and 'good intentions' spectacularly coming undone.
Boeing's CEO is incredibly still in office inspite of damning evidence of incompetence which is a straight indictment the whole concept of 'shareholder interest' and accountability.
Can anyone provide one instance where shareholder interest has ensured some kind of accountability of management? Why shouldn't Boeings top management be fired for seriously damaging the company and the brand?
If this doesn't affect Boeing's share price what will?
This raises even more questions about the stock markets accurately reflecting business sustainability, revenue pipelines and brand damage given 737 Max orders are now essentially over. [1][2]
Now suppose Russia already has a history of meddling in US internal affairs and funding coups within the US, will Russian youtube with videos on US protests be really even allowed to operate here? Would anyone here even be making arguments about democracy, freedom and enlightenment?
There is always a kind of dissonance and double standards in these discussions. You can't let the harassment and persecution of whistle blowers like Assange, Snowden, Manning, the protestors at Standing Rock and immigrant activists and other brazen attacks on democracy go unchallenged and then claim to be 'concerned' about democracy in far off Russia or China. That is politics, not concern for values.
These values if they are to have any meaning can only apply to actions not actors, and using them to to demonize some and excuse others renders them meaningless, and in many ways this has already happened with the widespread abuse of human rights and democracy by some to achieve other objectives.