Some cliff notes for those wondering what the fuss is about:

• In 2011, three nuclear reactors in Fukushima went into meltdown and released radioactive contamination into the environment, including oceanwater
• The facilities remain flooded with a volume of contaminated water that has been described as “500 Olympic-sized pools”
• As part of the ongoing effort to clean up Fukushima, Japan wants to eventually remove all of the remaining contaminated water
• Japan’s plan to do this involves reducing the radioactivity of the water using a filtration process known as ALPS while staging out water releases over a period of 30 years
• The main remaining contaminant in the water following ALPS filtration is expected to be Tritium, which samples show as existing within the threshold that is considered safe for human consumption.
• This plan was approved by the UN after determining that the radiological impact would be “negligible”
• China and South Korea both oppose the plan. Wang Wenbin, a spokesman for the the Chinese Foreign Ministry was quoted calling the plan “extremely selfish and irresponsible” and stated that “The ocean is humanity’s common good, not Japan’s private sewer”
• Concerns over Tritium release have been criticized, as other active reactors in the region are known to release similar levels of the substance into the ocean (e.g.: those at the Yangjiang nuclear plant), though it is also worth noting that this criticism hinges upon the assumption that the ALPS filtration process will be as reliable as early results suggest. It requires trusting that Japan will be completely diligent in overseeing their filtration efforts so that radioactive Cesium is not released into oceanwater.

… or I could just use dmenu on an OS that I don’t have to “debloat” to make useable?

You can disable searching as a fall-through, but you cannot disable web results appearing inside of the menu itself, which is what slows it down. At least, that was the case for the first 4 years or so before I stopped using Windows 10 and switched to Linux.

You know how when you press the Windows key and are able to type into the searchbar? Prior to 10, this bar did an instant local-only search of your desktop applications and (if you enabled it) select cached documents. Imagine building up the muscle memory of using this to launch applications for a decade or two to the point where you don’t even look at the screen anymore when launching apps. Now imagine that Windows 10 comes along and introduces a mandatory internet search that has to complete before it lets you see the local results that you were actually looking for.

Now imagine not being able to forget how snappy it used to be every single time you launch an application. Imagine the annoyance of being punished for a typo by having Edge open up a Bing search instead of the application you were trying to launch. Imagine not noticing the error and waiting 5 seconds for Bing to boot up, only to be confusedly greeted by a search you didn’t ask for in a browser you wish you could uninstall. Imagine installing third-party applications to try and restore the old search experience only for it to get regularly broken by OS updates you cannot opt out of and are only sometimes notified of in advance (another “feature” that Windows 10 brought).

IMO Windows 7 was the last “pure” Windows before the power balance at Microsoft tipped in favor of the cloud & sales people.

Character building exercise and/or tragic backstory

I feel that’s a reasonable perspective to have and I’m receptive to it. My main thinking against it is that coercing collaboration is really hard at a systems level – I’m reminded of that one time Steve Jobs tried to make it so that the new Pixar building would have just one bathroom facility because he felt like that would lead to more people spontaneously bumping into each other.

That’s just a flowery way of saying that I don’t have any fundamentally better ideas, though. Traditional political greases like trading favors & porkbarreling are something I’m willing to settle for so long as they don’t remain the exclusive domain of geriatrics. With that being said, I am by no means an expert and I’d love to hear more talk about alternatives

Damn, he looks old in that video. It strikes me as kind of cruel that our political system so strongly incentivizes seniority, both for the young fresh politicians who’re just getting started and the career politicians who feel like they can’t retire because they need to justify dumping the best decades of their lives slowly shimmying up that totem-pole.

FWIW: I do think that connections and experience really do matter for good governance, but no other industry pushes things this far. It’s messed up and it’s messing everything else up, too.

I see! Thank you for clarifying. I am very sorry for inventing premises and arriving at illogical conclusions.

What’s your point, exactly? Let’s say we accept your premise that this is an unfair double-standard that Microsoft shouldn’t have to respect… have you considered the logical conclusion that this creates? That the public should just… blithely accept Google-style nag prompts baked into literally any piece of software or hardware, even when they hold a paid license? I don’t think a reasonable person would intentionally advocate for such a thing, so please help me understand what you really meant.

Note that I’m specifically including “in an an instance-local post” because I am assuming admins don’t want to provide free cloud image hosting to random internet people for arbitrary non-lemmy use.

Note that I at no point allude to hotlinking from outside of the instance. Unless you want it to be possible to create an image post, delete the post, and then have an orphaned image forever (thereby creating an attack vector), you do need to solve that problem. If you solve that problem without considering crossposts and comment hotlinks within the scope of your own instance, you’re going to cause breakage. If you’re forced to consider these things before triggering the deletion regardless, then you’re not saving much on performance.

Thanks for the heads up! FWIW: It looks like Shinobu managed to post exactly one Bungo thread: https://ani.social/post/36938. Yes, “Bungo”. That’s the official English localization that got chosen even though the fan community obviously prefers the Hepburn romanization.

In any case… the ominous “Episode 51” from the linked thread’s title seems to suggest that something janky went down with the handling of episode numbers. Under the hood, I imagine something like this is going on: “the prior episode was episode 51 and MAL says that we’re not at episode 52 yet, so there’s nothing to post!”. I do see that there are upstream changes to the summer season config which include an offset for the bungo crunchyroll source, so I’ll start by pulling that in and seeing if it has any effect on the problem. If not, then it might take a little while longer as I try to figure out a good way to manually unstuck bungo’s episode counter.

Meh, it’s a losing battle try to establish what’s actually going on mechanically. It’s best to just stick to the rules we can prove and leave the underlying “how” as an implementation detail.

What we know is that it is possible for distant particles to become entangled without respect for relativistic limits. There’s effectively no difference between saying that the entanglement propagates regardless of distance (simultaneously FTL) or that the entanglement propagates regardless of time (sub-FTL regardless of simultaneity).

The issue is that an observer must at some point have observed both particles to know that they’ve become entangled. This is already a problem at any scale, but it gets much worse at relativistic distances because you can no longer even be certain when the two tangles are entangled, including and up to whether or not the particle you are locally observing is currently entangled. You’re stuck playing relativistic Two Generals’ Problem in such a way that if there was an FTL transmission, any useful information from it is rendered inaccessible without first receiving additional sub-FTL information.

This is the fundamentally frustrating thing about quantum mechanics. As far as we currently understand physics, any experiment which would reveal the actual underlying physical nature of the quantum world would itself be physically impossible (e.g.: FTL travel, time travel, violating the uncertainty principle).

What’s the practical difference? In both cases you’re culling images based on whether they’re orphaned or not.

If you’re suggesting that the implementation be based on setting individual timers instead of simply validating the whole database at regular intervals, consider whether or not the complexity of such a system is actually worth the tradeoff.

“Complexity comshmexity”, you might say. “Surely it’s not a big deal!”. Well… what about an image that used to belong to a valid post that later got deleted? Guess you have to take that edge case into account and add a deletion trigger there as well! But what if there were other comments/posts on the same instance hotlinking the same image? Guess you have to scan the whole DB every time before running the deletion trigger to be safe! Wait… wasn’t the whole purpose of setting this up with individual jobs to avoid doing a scripted DB scan?

Yes, but only on motorcycles. That’s because there’s no such thing as an automatic motorcycle^{[1][2][3][4][5]}, so you have to learn manual if you want to ride one. Unfortunately this skill doesn’t transfer well to manual driving because on bikes you operate the clutch with your hand and the shift with your foot. I’m not terribly worried about that, though… I’ve literally never even been on the inside of a manual drive car before!

For context: I’m mid-20s from the American south.

Yeah that happens to me too, but I’m often happy with that because it fits well with my personal tendency to hyperfixate on new topics for a while.

What I like to do is ride out a trend until I lose interest and then start Not Interesteding them. It doesn’t take long for them to fall out of my feed and from that point on only surface every once in a while if a particularly strong video is currently making the rounds.

Don’t hesitate to throw out negative feedback even for stuff you feel lukewarm about. Youtube can take the hint without going overboard and forgetting that interest too completely.

I always keep watch history turned on, because the recommendation system has always sucked if you kept it turned off. It’s more honest to the user now that they give up instead of intentionally sucking – “we can’t give recommendations if we don’t know what you tend to watch”. That basically makes sense to me and I accept the tradeoff this poses.

I know a lot of people think Youtube recommendations always suck and are therefore not even worth trying, but I beg to disagree. You can cultivate good recommendations, even if your interests have no overlap with the default front-page. It comes down to two basic ingredients:

1. Use the “Not Interested” button on bad recommendations
2. Click on the like/dislike buttons after watching videos

By default Youtube is going to try feeding you lowest common denominator junk. This is because it starts out knowing very little about you besides broad demographics. The more feedback you give it the less it falls back on this crutch until eventually you get solid recommendations. Every single bad recommendation is a hidden opportunity to tell Youtube to get that garbage out of your face.

And, yeah… in my experience this really works. If you click the buttons and make it a habit, you can get some really great stuff! As encouragement, I’ll share a selection from my home feed full of fresh videos relevant to my tastes. Even the topic bar is on point:

I’ll probably watch all 3 of these videos at some point, which I think indicates a pretty successful outcome. In fact, over the years, I’ve found hundreds of channels almost exclusively using the recommendation system. Even if you primarily stick to your subscription box, improving your recommendations can help you with building that out little by little.

(Note: I am deliberately avoiding the question of whether or not one should want an algorithm to intimately understand their interests because that’s a hard conversation and my soul has already long since been sold)

Claude doesn’t believe in you.

Well in that case I guess he’s been cursed by fate in an uncaring world 🤷

Counterpoint: he got caught. Whatever his offensive capabilities are, his security posture is evidently lacking. Recruiting a glass cannon like that might not work out if you’re looking for help with security hardening.

Well, between getting doxxed and annihilating any chance he had at getting a lenient sentencing, the more sensible decision would have probably been to sit on his hands and bide time for a couple months lol.