anindefinitearticle

joined 1 year ago
[–] anindefinitearticle 4 points 5 months ago

Jefferey Epstein didn’t kill himself.

Before he didn’t kill himself, he infamously ran some sex clubs.

These would be well-known examples representing a subset of what I would consider to be “problematic” sex clubs.

I would not want to be a part of a pride celebration where clubs like those have representation.

Pride is about throwing bricks at cops and celebrating our suppressed diversity, not the kinds of sex clubs that politicians go to. Pride is about tearing down hierarchies and problematic power dynamics, not fetishizing them. Or, at least, that’s my understanding of pride having never been to any sort of pride event. I know the history with stonewall and all of that, and that’s my picture of pride and what it should be.

The kinds of sex clubs that politicians go to are the only kinds of sex clubs of which I am aware, so I’m skeptical of sex clubs being represented at pride.

[–] anindefinitearticle 12 points 5 months ago

It’s June!

[–] anindefinitearticle 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (5 children)

What kind of a “community” exists around kink? Or do you just mean the superset of communities like furries, and whatever else is out there? What’s the line between those and more problematic sex clubs?

[–] anindefinitearticle 18 points 5 months ago (6 children)

I love this, but it needs a new name.

Philly cheese steak + New York cheesecake = something named for New Jersey.

[–] anindefinitearticle 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Thanks for the leads and the good conversation. I have found that being an idiot in public and then deescalating is one of the fastest ways to gather information.

[–] anindefinitearticle 1 points 5 months ago

Thanks for the info. That makes a lot of sense. You’re giving me a lot of good info for what to do the next time I have a block of time to play around with something like this.

[–] anindefinitearticle 1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Ok, let me fix my language. Thanks for the reference definitions, I’ll freely admit that I’m a bit rusty.

I was considering Wayland to be the server, not the protocol. I’ll adjust the spirit of my argument with this correction, and take you through a sample use-case of a system I ran on X about a decade ago.

I was arguing that having many implementations of display clients maintained by many different DEs can lead to a contradictory and confusing management environment. I’ll adjust this argument to also include the fact that the display servers are also being separately maintained.

The system that I ran a decade ago was a research box that about a dozen scientists would remote into via vnc from their laptops. Each scientist had their choice of DE which they could run and manage via the .xinit file in their home directories. This gave them a lot of choice and freedom over how they set up their personal UI (people can be finicky and prefer specific workflows), while also allowing simultaneous resource usage of the data and analysis drives, and the hundreds of cpu cores for various runs, and the hundreds of gigs of ram.

Such a system in Wayland-world would require each scientist to customize their environment using a DE-specific display-client-side configuration management scheme. Each of these would then have to talk to a different display server, as implemented by their specific DE. Sure, each client-server pair is using the Wayland protocol, but running a dozen display servers in the extreme case of a dozen different DE choices is not resource efficient. In a Wayland-world, I would probably have to enforce a standard server implementation of the Wayland protocol to cut down on all of the different display servers clogging up the memory and cpu usage. Sorry if one scientist wants KDE and another wants gnome and another wants i3 (now sway/wlroots), we have to cut down on diversity and user choice because of the fragmentation of the display environment. Under a single X server, it was easy to allow for user-facing interface diversity because of the standardization of the display server. Under my understanding of Wayland (as updated by your comment), supporting this interface diversity would require server-side diversity and server-side system resource duplication that would hinder the ability to efficiently present diverse options to the end users.

If there is anything that I am still misunderstanding, please continue to correct me and help me get caught up on missing the last several years of reality.

[–] anindefinitearticle 1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Thanks for pointing out that in this case the DM is using X regardless of whatever graphical environment gets loaded when the user logs in. This really is a moot point/discussion. I’m still glad I raised it to get perspectives like yours.

You’re right that I should play around with wlroots a bit more. It’s been a while, personally. Mostly because it’s been a while since I’ve had time to just play around with my system. My life is at a point that it looks like I’ll have that free time soon, for better or for worse.

I’ll note that I do like alternative init systems for diversity and competition and because systemd was very hungry and rigid. An init system is also a bit more fundamental to system stability than a display server, so I think it’s reasonable to be critical of systemd and Wayland for contradictory reasons. Systemd has also come a very long way in the past decade plus. I have also seen it learn from the other ideas implemented in its competition, mirroring your argument. Diversity and unification are not at odds with each other, but are different parts of the same cycle of improvement.

view more: ‹ prev next ›