Why someone keeps chasing the latest gadgets when the old ones work just fine is beyond me.

Nobody is waiting every year for the brand new line of washing machines. Why is there a need to swap phones this frequently?

I imagine it wouldn’t take long until someone finds a way to disable that LED.

The CEO of Unity was also CEO, COO, and president of EA. So, is anyone surprised?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Riccitiello

Or even better: buy soon to expire put options just before the announcement. 10x your money.

Damn… that’s rough.

Hopefully they’ll backpedal on this decision for now (they are already getting a lot of flack). But I guess the message has been sent. Wouldn’t be surprised if Unity starts bleeding users after this.

Best of luck!

For the studios releasing a game in a few months, it’s probably too late to ditch unity, but would make sense to start looking at alternatives for their next projects.

Wouldn’t be surprised if Godot explodes in popularity in the next 5 years.

According to the article, it’s not retroactively charged, but still bad if your game is about to come out and you haven’t accounted for this.

The margins on the gamedev industry are not that large, you should read some testimonies from veterans. It’s a ruthless industry.

Games take years to make, and you can’t change engines now if your game is about to come out.

Genuinely curious, what would the advantages be?

Also, what if the Linux distro does not have systemd?

Yes.

All my self hosted containers are bound to some volume (since they require reading settings or databases).

True.

But I assume OP was already running docker from that user, so they are comfortable with those permissions.

Maybe should have made it clearer. Added to my other post. Thanks!

You shouldn’t need sudo to run docker, just can create a docker group and add your user to it. This will give you the steps on how to run docker without sudo.

Edit: as pointed out below, please make sure that you’re comfortable with giving these permissions to the user you’re adding to the docker group.

For the littering part, just type crontab -e and add the following line:

@daily docker system prune -a -f

I have written nothing implying that, no.

From the very first reply, you implied that the argument that the EFF made was wrong, and that this precedent could not be used to block women’s access to abortion: “It’s incredibly easy for an ISP to point out that they’re not going to block a network for a different reason by pointing out it’s… not the same reason. Banning abortion information is not the same thing as banning a harassment network that’s causing deaths.”

I’ve said the EFF’s argument is bullshit because the US government cannot enforce the laws the EFF says could be used. Not that they don’t exist, but that this is an international network that heavily uses anonymity. The US government likely cannot at all, and if it can can only do expensively and slowly, too slowly to prevent deaths, ban this website.

If that’s the case, how did they get Ross Ulbricht? He ran a darkweb marketplace, in theory, harder to pin down than something on the clearnet like Kiwi Farms.

The same precedent that bans Kiwi Farms at the ISP level, could be used to block women’s access to safe abortion, causing deaths as well. And no, I’m not gonna take your word for it that it can be avoided in court in the future. You’re just some rando on the internet with no legal expertise, unlike the EFF.

I’m all in favor in prosecuting people responsible for peoples’ deaths and shutting down that website, but not by using something that could cause harm to others in the future.

No offense, but keep your patronizing “Anyone who disagrees with me could only have just heard of this article I just skimmed, and not been discussing it in depth for the last week” bullshit out of my replies.

So, the EFF has 33 years of experience fighting in courts on matters of digital rights, and somehow you feel like you know both the current law and the legal consequences of court precedents better than them?

Based on how composed you’ve been in this comment section, I’m going to assume the EFF has been around longer than you have.

Could you please read the whole article before commenting?

It’s incredibly easy for an ISP to point out that they’re not going to block a network for a different reason by pointing out it’s… not the same reason.

No offense, but don’t pursue a law degree, that’s not how things work in the real world. The EFF has a long history of fighting these sorts of things in court, they have enough experienced people to know what they are talking about.

A state has enough leverage to push around an ISP to comply, and the ISP gains nothing in opposing.

The EFF deserves to be roundly condemned for this, especially as it has no obvious alternative.

There is. People can be prosecuted individually. This has happened in the past without ISPs blocking whole websites.

The position is intellectually dishonest unless you’re actually pro-killing-transgender people.

Speaking of fallacies…

To the ones down-voting this comment.

People keep piling up on the EFF without reading that article.

Once an ISP indicates it’s willing to police content by blocking traffic, more pressure from other quarters will follow, and they won’t all share your views or values. For example, an ISP, under pressure from the attorney general of a state that bans abortions, might decide to interfere with traffic to a site that raises money to help people get abortions, or provides information about self-managed abortions. Having set a precedent in one context, it is very difficult for an ISP to deny it in another, especially when even considering the request takes skill and nuance. We all know how lousy big user-facing platforms like Facebook are at content moderation—and that’s with significant resources. Tier 1 ISPs don’t have the ability or the incentive to build content evaluation teams that are even as effective as those of the giant platforms who know far more about their end users and yet still engage in harmful censorship.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/08/isps-should-not-police-online-speech-no-matter-how-awful-it

The EFF supports prosecuting Kiwi Farms, they are just opposed to the dangerous precedent an ISP block sets.

Wouldn’t be surprised if it’s some compromised machine that someone else is controlling for illegal activities.

Oh I see what you mean, I thought you meant it wouldn’t update at all during a normal apt upgrade.