Yes, the GDPR covers almost everything you do with personal data. That is the point. As long as you’re being respectful to data subjects the GDPR is surprisingly mild.

You’re the one claiming the government is regulating tech too much, below an article about Apple making that same claim. And when pressed about specifics, you brand the entire thing as off-topic.

It is very much on topic, you just don’t want to provide an argument.

What is wrong with the GDPR and the ePrivacy directive? The only problem I see is that they don’t go far enough (online tracking, for example)

Not disappear entirely, but most households won’t own desktop computers or HDDs.

The person who created git clearly cannot be trusted to write good kernel code. I’m CC’ing Konstantin to disable his account, whoever he is.

I think they mean uPnP

Turns out when Zuckerbot was talking about “allowing more speech on the platform”, he just meant more slurs.

How does that increase the risk compared to something like JBOD or overlayfs? In both cases you will lose data if a drive fails. Keep in mind that this is btrfs raid0, not regular raid. If anything that decreases the chance of corruption because the metadata is redundantly stored on both drives.

No mention of systemd? This is unacceptable.

A disk failure will cause you to lose data, yes. But that’s also the case in all the other solutions discussed here. Backups should be handled separately and are not part of the original question.

Have you considered simply setting btrfs to RAID 0?

“May be on shaky legal ground”

The law clearly states that Tiktok is banned and should be made inaccessible. The president cannot unilaterally change the law. They even got a lawyer to explain this to them.

Regardless of what you think of the ban, there can be no doubt about the fact that this is what the law says. No matter what Trump claims. If journalists show this level of misregard for truth and the rule of law, things are going to become much worse.

The revolution will not be televised.

Even if you computer is not exposed to the internet: are you certain that every other device on the network is safe (even on public wifi)? Would you immediately raise the alarm if you saw a second printer in the list with the same name, or something like “Print to file”? I think I personally could fall for that under the right circumstances.

Putin couldn’t care less about the support from some random programmers. Be realistic, what do you expect them to do? Take up arms? Protest and get imprisoned? Vote in the sham elections?

Targeting random civilians in hopes of political change is the strategy of terrorists.

So then you agree that there is no reason to be “glad” about this?

And how exactly is banning these contributors supposed to stop the invasion? These people have no control or culpability.

Is this a threat?

“Safe” being defined in a user-hostile manier, i.e. with unmodified Google components and not rooted.

“Google-controlled” would be a better word.

Such is the fate of hypercentralized spaces. The fediverse fixes this.

I don’t see how this is so difficult. Given the choice between a narcissistic billionaire or an independent, accountable government commission that’s bound by the rule of law, I’ll choose the latter every time.