Notices by 寮 (ryo@social.076.moe), page 45
-
寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Saturday, 07-Jan-2023 12:50:31 JST 
寮
yup.
I fully agree.
You want censorship?
Fine, but you go first, be the example you want to see! -
寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Saturday, 07-Jan-2023 12:48:28 JST
寮
> They would never make a Firefox/Chrome-tier abomination themselves
*coughicecatcough*
> I think the biggest negatives would be their core utils, I guess
And gcc, though I don't really have much against gcc, it's doing its job, just compilation takes unnecessarily long and binaries it spits out are unnecessarily large compared to say tcc for example.
> because many programs depend on it and can't be built with musl, I hear
It can't be used with SoystemD, which is really the big reason why Juan RP decided to not use it for Void Linux.
Though I would rather classify Emacs as an operating system within an operating system rather than a development environment, because it can do so many more things that has nothing to do with development, some of which you listed already. -
寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Saturday, 07-Jan-2023 11:43:21 JST
寮
And this is what gives raise to black markets either on the darknet or in real life.
(By the way, nice phone they've used for the article thumbnail.)
Digital slavery scamming is now mandatory to purchase tobacco products in Nuvaduh
https://social.076.moe/url/50432 -
寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Saturday, 07-Jan-2023 11:40:39 JST
寮
How am I not surprised to see a deranged lunatic maskurbating as a "professor" saying this?
New YAWK media professor says free speech should be censored on soycial media, delights in cancer culture
https://social.076.moe/url/50393 -
寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Saturday, 07-Jan-2023 10:21:59 JST
寮
Technically, ARM is a RISC clone (not the other way around), but locked down and loysensed out to whoever pays them to use it.
It's just that RISC started gaining traction just recently.
Though not sure if I'd really support GNU in finishing Hurd after them having stalled it 31 years ago in favor for the Linux kernel, because even though Stallman is seemingly more tech freedom aware than Torvalds is, every single GNU tool is bloat, so I'd expect Hurd to be bloat as well when that gets developed again.
But I can sympethise with the Linux kernel being so bloated in a way, because there's so much more hardware today than there were a decade ago, they all require a separate driver which are all probably very bloated too, and on top of that most of them are proprietary blobs or poor attempts on rewriting the driver too.
But I could be wrong on that, because I need a proper comparison between Linux and Linux-libre in order to actually be sure. -
寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Friday, 06-Jan-2023 21:52:57 JST
寮
In response to that "Virus Pushers Against Clotshots" link, to me it shows how insane people can be.
Sure, I disagree with the yes-virus camp, but I wouldn't make a whole wall of shame out of them.
What makes things even more cringe is the "The virus issue doesn't matter / Silent / non-committal" list, like if you MUST pick a side even if you don't want to, which is pretty similar to the Ukraina vs Roshan bullcrap; pick a side or else you're by default in Team Roshan.
And the removal list is also rather infuriating, it's basically like "good to see new allies, but we'll continue to shame them anyway".
Confirms even more to me how to Americans politics is what soccer/football is to Europeans.
Though the big difference here is, if the yes-virus camp would have made this list, I would condemn them equally as the no-virus camp.
Likewise in the case of Ukraina vs Roshan, if the default would have been Team Ukraina if you refuse to pick a side, I'd condemn them just as much.
So rating the list it's either of the 3 options:
1. An infiltrator to make the side they claim to represent look stupid.
2. Some idiot who takes this debate way too seriously.
3. Both at the same time. -
寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Friday, 06-Jan-2023 21:33:13 JST
寮
ループかｗ -
寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Friday, 06-Jan-2023 21:25:41 JST
寮
Or the Qanon larpers who get so offended whenever their ideology got challenged.
I've even seen them mass-blocking and mass-attacking a single Shitter account en mass just like how the woke would do against their opponents.
I had that in mind, but forgot to add, so here you go. -
寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Friday, 06-Jan-2023 21:23:06 JST
寮
> What difference does it make on whether "virus" is real or not?
I'm bringing up the lack of existance of viruses even fewer times than the mainstream media and alternative media bring up the presense of it.
The only reason why I bring it up more than necessary is because I'm rather tired of it all, we (we as in the entire civilization of the earth) used to start and stop scamdemics, but for whatever reason now we seemingly only know how to start them and not stop them.
It's just that every time I say "the fake virus that doesn't exist", you come up with a counter agrument, which is fine, but every single time?
So please, don't tell me that I'm the one who starts this war!
I'd prefer to end that "war" (if you can even call it a war) if anything.
I don't mind if you believe it exists or not, worse is that there are people out there who are still outright afraid of it, which is what ultimately keeps this bullshit going.
> Semantics... The thing around LGBT is about calling "he/she/they" and the thing here is about naming "toxin/virus".
That's perhaps just some people, though I don't know of any of them.
I certainly know people in the flat earth vs round earth debate who get offended by words like "planet" or "globe", so I can see where you're coming from.
But in the yes-virus vs no-virus debate I've never seen any of that.
Or it's just me who missed it because I don't rely on 3rd party (mis)information from any side.
I used to, but I snapped out of it long ago. -
寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Friday, 06-Jan-2023 20:42:18 JST
寮
> I don't think you understand the problem.
Either you or me, or both.
> I think I can assume we all know there is "something" causing illness?
yup.
> But what does this yes/no-virus war changes at all?
Dunno, you started this debate.
> What if we really debunked that "virus" does not exist in any means?
??
> Look at the LGBT people that got mad because someone used the wrong pronoun, but the genitals can describe the gender better objectively. The yes/no-virus is just like them.
Not sure how that relates to anything.
> It's good to challenge mainstream conversations, but then we can't accept everything just because it's "not mainstream".
Which is not what I was implying.
> You can assume I am either lying or mass-poisoned by my government through food or water
I didn't make this ASSumption.
> but I got sick too and positive with the rapid test
It's possible, I heard of people getting sick and positive, sick and negative, not sick and positive, and not sick and negative, so it's saying nothing. -
寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Friday, 06-Jan-2023 20:33:37 JST
寮
For the remainder of the article I'll categorize as:
Yes camp = yes-virus people are right.
No camp = no-virus people are right.
Middle camp = both sides have a point.
Mystery camp = can't confirm the claims, so neither side gets a point.
Accusation = just an accusation to make no-virus people look stupid with no evidence or receipts to back it up.
> Instead, they are misled into thinking that because they claim that “no virus particle has been isolated” based on the dictionary definition of isolation (instead of the virology definition), that that is proof that viruses don’t exist.
Not really sure on the terminology, and no further explanation is provided.
So remains no camp until an explanation can be provided.
No camp.
> Further, they require that the isolated particles are used to infect “test subjects” which I assume are lab animals. But it’s a human virus. So why are we testing it on lab animals? We won’t be able to get an IRB to approve infecting humans. And infecting humans is hard and would require a huge quantity of virions to achieve success; very likely more virions that can be successfully harvested and preserved for the experiment.
It doesn't prove any side right or wrong, but I'd say benefit of the doubt at best.
Middle camp.
> Even worse, they require each test subject to have identical sickness. Virology requires no such thing. My wife and I are completely different. We have different immune systems. I’m male, she’s female. We have different immune histories. We have different health issues. She got COVID first and lost her taste. I picked it up from her, and didn’t lose my taste. So this proves virology doesn’t exist?!?!
Doesn't prove the yes camp right, but has a good point.
No camp.
> And finally, the next impossible challenge. The virus isolated from test subjects must be identical to the original particles. I can guarantee you this is never true. This virus mutates in everyone and everyone gets many mutations. If virus in=virus out as they claim, there wouldn’t be any variants at all.
I can't remember this to even be claimed by anyone to begin with.
Neither the yes-virusers nor the no-virusers made the everyone is equal or different claim from all I know.
Mystery camp.
> So their challenge is based on a fairy tale world that virology works they way they think it does. They don’t understand virology, so they make these rookie errors.
> Did you notice that they have no test whatsoever to validate that their replacement hypothesis is true? Whoops! A slight oversight!
> The test for their hypothesis is simple: fit the observations over the last 100 years better than the current hypothesis.
> They can’t do this at all.
Could you though? (And by you I of course mean the writer of the article.)
The only reasonble thing I've seen thus far as the monetary part, of which no receipts even exist.
Accusation.
> They want you to cast aside 100+ years of scientific studies, all of which are consistent with the “virus theory” because they can’t find an experiment which meets their requirements.
Show me your experiment then.
I already did long ago when I pointed out that just blowing my nose until my throat is cleared immediately cured me, which only proves the "detox" """theory""" to be correct.
> Science doesn’t work that way. Science is a “best fit” of a hypothesis to data.
yup.
I'll skip the rest of the "bottom line" part simply because it's just silly.
> Nobody does the isolation work today because nobody needs an “isolated virus” to develop assays.
"Nobody does the calculation work today because nobody needs simple mathematics to develop X/Y/Z co-ordinates in 3D video games."
Sorry, but I'm not convinced.
It's all writing and making a fool of his opposition, and no actual evidence of people not challenging his theory, nor any actual evidence of the no-virus camp to be wrong.
The Mark Twain quote works in both directions, same can be said to the yes-virus camp.
I was going to give him the benefit of the doubt at first on the livestream debate part, but all he showed is people not responding to him.
To me it doesn't necessarily prove them being shy.
But he is right on 5G, junk food, and covAIDS relation being false, but that's because it was a counter-propaganda attempt by the same glowies who created the "virus will kill us all" propaganda.
The other thing he doesn't seem to answer is why they launch a major scamdemic once every 10 years?
And how comes they've already planned the next one for 2029? -
寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Friday, 06-Jan-2023 19:46:16 JST
寮
Actually, I went ahead and read it now.
Well, until the sentence "They want you to believe the unique gene sequences come from 5G or soda. It’s unbelievable that people actually take them seriously.".
I already knew the whole 5G thing is bullshit, simply because they said the same thing about 4G 10 years ago, and 3G 20 years ago.
As for soda, never heard of that part before at all.
I can't move this to anywhere, simply because the link between viruses, 5G, and soda is just bullshit from the get go.
Pretty legit points no how the "no-virus" camp refuses to take his challenge to prove their statement seriously, it makes sense to not take the risk if you can't prove your point.
So I can move this part up to the "yes-virus" camp.
However, on the other hand, the "They can’t even explain even a simple case where a family member gets COVID and then, all of a sudden, other people in the same household get the same illness." part is something I've never actually seen happening.
What I did see rather is that the lethally injected getting extremely sick whereas pure bloods that happen to be right in front of them don't even get a single symptom.
Hell, this even happened right before New Year holidays where I was in the same room as the boss of the company I'm doing a project for, he got incredibly sick, but had no effect on me.
He's double jabbed, I didn't even get a "test" which isn't a test.
Some other guy who's triple jabbed and only shows up once a week got sick, still no effect on me.
So I'll move this part more towards the middle, but still within the "no-virus" camp, simply because it doesn't prove the "yes-virus" camp right.
I'll read the rest in a moment to see to what conclusion I can come. -
寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Friday, 06-Jan-2023 19:25:46 JST
寮
Well I was having Iraq and claims of "weapons of mass destruction" back in 2004 in mind right after posting it, so it's certainly not the first time, but it sure went extreme since late 2016.
And the other difference is that back in 2004 when it turned out they were lying, at least they admitted their mistakes and apologized, but nowadays when they get exposed they just double down. -
寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Friday, 06-Jan-2023 19:22:58 JST
寮
I know you linked to other sources before, but not these actually.
The 2nd link doesn't say much other than being able to buy something?
But skimming through the 1st link reveals lots of information and good points, so I'll read through that over the weekend. -
寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Friday, 06-Jan-2023 18:20:47 JST
寮
Before November 2016:
・It doesn't exist until proven it exists.
・You're innocent until proven guilty.
・2 weeks = 14 days.
・2 + 2 = 4.
After November 2016:
・It exists until proven it doesn't exist.
・You're guilty until proven innocent.
・2 weeks = 3 years and counting.
・2 + 2 = 22. -
寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Friday, 06-Jan-2023 17:48:44 JST
寮
Since when do you plan a lab leak of a "real" virus while under development in advance, and have it all ready exactly on schedule?
I think we both agree that the whole "natural virus that spawned out of nowhere" the propagandists originally used sounded like some weird Disney story, but the "lab leak virus" thing the propagandists switched to right after 2020 US selections sounds a lot of some weird Biohazard (or Resident Evil in your case) story.
And I'm willing to change my mind on it, or at the very least give the yes-virusists the benefit of the doubt, but show me actual scientific evidene and hard proof of a live isolate, which even the WHO, CDC, and the other institutions to this day claim not to have.
Because if you can't prove its existance, it just doesn't exist, this used to be common sense prior to November 2016, then they slandered Russia for 4 years only to then turn out that whatever they said was not true, and that there was no evidence to back up their slandering. -
寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Friday, 06-Jan-2023 17:37:30 JST
寮
And I will probably forget a whole lots of others, like FreeDOS and its forks for example.
But I didn't write about the fact that CPU's and GPU's are so fucking proprietary just to make a massive list of operating systems, which is what "except for things like" already covers. -
寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Friday, 06-Jan-2023 16:21:00 JST
寮
https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/cat.html#tag_20_13
POSIX compliant cat only supports the "u" option.
u = "Write bytes from the input file to the standard output without delay as each is read."
On GNU/Linux, the options are AbeEnstTv, with e being a shorthand for vE, and u is being ignored, making GNU/Linux already POSIX non-compliant as it does absolutely nothing.
Among other options are the usual "help" and "version, which on both FreeBSD and OpenBSD are absent, and thus you can only see from the man pages.
On FreeBSD, the options are belnstuv, u being "Disable output buffering.", which is again POSIX non-compliant as it does something else than what is should do.
On OpenBSD, the options are benstuv, u being "The output is guaranteed to be unbuffered (see setvbuf(3)).", it's POSIX compliant!
On Plan9, the options are mn, no mention of u at all, so POSIX non-compliant.
And finally on Busybox (think Alpine, postmarketOS, and Android), the option is only u.......except it's ignored, so again POSIX non-compliant...
So cat from 5 major POSIX coreutils have been compared, only 1 of which is actually compliant.
Sad... -
寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Friday, 06-Jan-2023 14:38:20 JST
寮
Service announcement: Wayback Machine is now spying on you, so be careful! https://social.076.moe/url/48518 -
寮 (ryo@social.076.moe)'s status on Friday, 06-Jan-2023 14:36:31 JST
寮
Again, puritans and wokies are all the same.
Website Labels Loli Art as Pedophilia, Slanders Japan, Links to Awful Vice Hitpiece
https://social.076.moe/url/48515 https://social.076.moe/url/48514
All ０７６萌ＳＮＳ content and data are available under the