TA0x0

4 ms·

1.
by TA0x0 6y ago
>The reasoning presented in this thread is pretty representative of the thought processes Damore laid out in his memo. Logical, rational, built from facts. The thought process used by a Harvard grad, MIT research scientist. >Which is
2.
by TA0x0 6y ago
>Yeah, that's exactly why that's not enough data to put together policy. Except it is, and I just proved it above. >You might as well measure bumps on people's heads to predict whether they want anti-violence funding Bu
3.
by TA0x0 6y ago
>Making a terse sociological claim from statistics is almost always open to interpretation. Almost, but in specific cases like above, it is not open to interpretation. It's a raw fact. >Statistics is the science of interpreting d
4.
by TA0x0 6y ago
Interpretations are not facts. There are some facts, like the one I listed above, that are not open to interpretation.
5.
by TA0x0 6y ago
>Quite possibly, if one shows one's work on how one arrived at that statement (statistics can be bloody slippery things, and while individual data points are facts, the analysis, interpretation, and summarization of them starts to w
6.
by TA0x0 6y ago
Phrenology and hysteria are not facts, and their interpretations are not facts either. Some facts are not open to interpretation.
7.
by TA0x0 6y ago
Are facts racist and sexist?
8.
by TA0x0 6y ago
I responded to the comments below. These tools are not fundamentally broken, you're just ignorant in this space. They have always provided the functionality needed. Scripting can easily manage processes at a higher level, and it&#x27
9.
by TA0x0 6y ago
>If you really want systemd to add this then I'm sure they will look at your feature request or PR. The less systems touches the better. >I would urge you to actually check with your system instead of blindly dismissing me as wro
10.
by TA0x0 6y ago
>I've already been in a forest of bash scripts and I would not go back there again. I have no comment on systemd's implementation but the implementation you're talking about is also incorrect. In certain cases I don't
11.
by TA0x0 6y ago
The functionality to gracefully end long running background processes has been a part of standard killall, pkill, etc. for quite some time. Even then, yes, the functionality of using ps and kill together has existed for 20+ years. Those too
12.
by TA0x0 6y ago
You have to, since systemd implemented the feature incorrectly. You're missing the forest for the trees.
13.
by TA0x0 6y ago
The functionality existed 25 years ago. systemd coming along and poorly implementing it provides nothing.
14.
by TA0x0 6y ago
Sounds like you had junior admins at best leading your university's *NIX department. A mid-level admin in 1995 could have easily made a 100 line script to kill background processes from non-logged in users that were running over three
15.
by TA0x0 7y ago
Already happening. Instead of reserving, they're mining bitcoin by spinning up tens of thousands of dollars in infrastructure in the cloud.
16.
by TA0x0 7y ago
They unfortunately do not support WireGuard. Mullvad is probably the best way to go at the moment.