Doesn't surprise me. Musk has cultivated and emboldened racists, homophobes, cryptobros, misogynists, and the far right and the platform has turned into a cesspit. Meanwhile scammers & bots run rampant and the blueticks stink up every thread with cretinous remarks and trolling.
I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people have just given up with it, or moved to another social media that isn't so toxic.
Definitely. I think it has just about reached a critical mass users writing content to attract new users and it looks so similar to Twitter there is practically zero friction in moving. I think it'll really kick off when we see more heavy hitters coming over - big news networks, public figures, governments etc.
I think news orgs in particular should be removing themselves from obnoxious social media platforms (e.g. Twitter) and move to somewhere where the engagement is more genuine and not toxic rants by racists and morons.
Concerning logs:
So people object to systemd writing binary logs and yet they can get text, or throw it into splunk or do whatever they like. The purpose of the binary is make security, auditing and forensics better than it is for text.
As for scripts, the point I'm making is systemd didn't supplant sysvinit, it supplanted upstart. Upstart recognized that writing massive scripts to start/stop/restart a process was stupid and chose an event driven model for running stuff in a more declarative way. Basically upstart used a job system that was triggered by an event, e.g. the runlevel changes, so execute a job that might be to kick off a process. Systemd chose a dependency based model for starting stuff. It seems like dists preferred the latter and moved over to it. Solaris has smf which serves a similar purpose as systemd.
So systemd is declarative - you describe a unit in a .service file - the process to start, the user id to run it with, what other units it depends on etc. and allow the system to figure out how to launch it and take care of other issues. It means stuff happens in the right order and in parallel if it can be. It's fairly simple to write a unit file as opposed to a script. But if you needed to invoke a script you could do that too - write a unit file that invokes the script. You could even take a pre-existing init script and write a .service file that kicks it off.
Kind of sad there are still people raging over systemd. When it flares up in discussions there is the usual debunked nonsense:
What is more bizarre is the nostalgia and hearkening back to sysvinit scripts when systemd didn't replace sysvinit! Systemd replaced upstart which replaced sysvinit. Because writing 100s of lines of script to stop/start/restart a process sucked - insecure, slow, didn't scale, didn't capture dependencies and everyone knew it. Upstart was the first attempt to solve the issue and was used in Debian / Ubuntu, Fedora / Red Hat, openSUSE and others until systemd came along.
I remember someone saying "there is no way this firearm could have fired, it was a modern reproduction gun with modern safety features like half cock". So I went off and found the manual for that firearm and it explicitly mentioned things NOT to do, which included banging the gun, releasing the hammer etc. So regardless of modern safety features or not, even the manufacturer gave warnings that correspond to some of the statements Baldwin made about it just going off.
That doesn't excuse sloppy firearm safety, or the use of live rounds, or the incompetence of the armorer. But like most things, an accident is not just one thing but a chain of events.
You don't have to take your eyes off the road to operate a control. You might need to learn where some are in a new car, but then you instinctively reach for and operate the ones you use all the time. It's muscle memory.
This is not the case in a touch screen where controls may or may not be visible at any given time and you have no chance of operating them unless you physically look at the screen to control where you touch it. Maybe this arrangement is fine for some non-critical functions, but it absolutely isn't for critical ones.
What is worse is that cars from Tesla are even getting rid of indicator stalks which is fantasically dangerous. Maybe it's not a big deal in the US where roundabouts are uncommon but they are all over the place in Europe and the rest of the world and lack of indicators will cause crashes and fatalities. Just so Elon Musk could save a few bucks on a stalk. And if that results in a lower EuroNCAP score then boohoo for him. I can imagine the raging and legal threats that he'll engage in if that happens.
Personally I think that the following car functions should be mandatory physical controls - wipers, indicators, hazards, side/headlights, door locks, defogger / defroster, electronic parking brake. forward/reverse/neutral/park. And they should be controls that have fixed position in the car (i.e. not on the wheel) with positive and negative feedback.
And fuck Tesla or any other manufacturer that wants to cheap out on a couple of bucks by removing them. Removing physical controls has obvious safety implications to drivers who are distracted trying to find icons on a tablet.
That largely depends on the cereal. In the UK there are popular cereal types which have very little sugar in them - oats, weetabix, shredded wheat, ready brek that are fine for diabetics. The worst offenders would be kids cereals & anything overtly sugary as well as things like granola, muesli etc. Things like cornflakes, shreddies, rice krispies sit somewhere at the low end - not healthy per se but fairly low in sugar
Assuming someone by necessity needed to do that, then a bowl of porridge would be better than cereal. It would be cheaper to buy, more filling & nutritious. And someone that cash strapped shouldn't be eating Kelloggs cereals at all since the generic equivalent probably costs half the price and tastes the same.
I'm sure it's super complicated what he owns, what his entities own, and what they owe the banks and other investors.
Not really. Pre-musk, reporting racism & other abuses was more likely to illicit a response than not. Nowadays it is a was of time to even bother unless it is extremely overt.. And all the shitheads with few exceptions who were perma banned got reinstated no matter how awful they were.
And the situation with blueticks is self evident. It used to mean somebody noteworthy - journalists, actors, politicians, authors, scientists etc. Now it's trolls and narcissists with money to waste on a vanity tick. Popular feeds will have pages of inane comments by these scumbags to scroll through. There are even actual Nazis with blueticks who complain/brag about the ad revenues they receive from engagement. It couldn't be any more removed than the way it was.