fishos

Interesting how the save now feature was broken until right up until the US election. Makes it easier to edit news articles on the fly without leaving a trail. Could be a motive for who was behind it - but I'm just speculating.

Exactly. Eventually what we see now as cutting edge will become "bare minimum" or even "obsolete" hardware one day. Eventually the camera on your cell phone will by default be taking such high resolution pictures that anything less that a TB of onboard storage will seem quaint.

If you want to search and index it, you don't want to do that on tapes. It's doable, but difficult. And what benefits tapes gain in reliability/long term storage, a RAID system would negate. Cheaper large SSDs make these kinds of systems more economical to the average person.

The issue is, every time we make a great leap in storage medium, we tend to use that new storage for BIGGER files. Higher quality media and all that. Back in the day, the average movie file was measured in the MB. Now it's GB. Think about an old floppy with 1.4 MB of data and how many text files you stored on it. You couldn't ever imagine needing more space. Then came pictures and music files. Video files. Then higher resolution picture and video files. Suddenly even your text documents aren't just raw .txt files, but Word documents and interactive PDFs.

As storage improves, what we expect to be able to carry around with us or have in our home computer changes. I'm currently running a home server with 18TB of storage. An amount that I would have never dreamed of possessing 20 years ago, and yet here I am debating when I grab that 24TB drive because I can already see me running out of space in a few months.

This is all to say that I really don't think there will ever be a maximum amount a user could need. Give them that maximum and in a week they'll have figured out a way to use it to capacity. I think video games and cartridge/disk size limitations and then the transition to digital games and balloning game size shows my point.

We're in Eternal September now. Have been for a few decades.

That's why I think the final iteration of the fediverse will be a mostly defederated bunch of echochamber bubbles. People don't actually want diverse opinions. They want a diverse group of people to share their opinion so that they can feel theirs is the dominant, right one. Give it 5 years and the fediverse will be just as much walled off and divided as the rest of the internet is now.

People like to complain about the evil's of humanity and yet always seem to act like it's forced upon us by some outside force. Like the 1% are a different species and not just glowing examples of our worst traits cranked up to max. Like someone else is making humanity act this way. But nah, it's just us and our nature. And until we understand and address that properly, none of our problems are going anywhere.

Lmao you are oblivious if you think it's possible to set up a network that someone CANT fuck up while having physical access to it.

It's not magic.

The point is NETWORKS ARE COMPLICATED. Users are generally dumb. The point is you don't expect them to have the knowledge to do it right. So they'll break something. Users with actual knowledge could yes, break things even worse.

That's EXACTLY why they're restricting hardware use.

Welcome to the conversation, smh

If everything is set up perfectly, it should work, sure. Now how many people do you think even know the difference between WAN and LAN? You expecting the bio or art major to not make any mistakes at all? Or the business major?

Users are often dumb. Imagine 100 people who think they know what they're doing trying to set up a bunch of custom networking.

That's your dorm.

Most dorms either outright prohibit using personal hardware like that or require the schools IT department to install it themselves and set it up.

Run a network of your own someday and you'll understand. It's hard enough to get your own network working perfectly without a bunch of wildcards popping up everywhere.

Things like Spotify or your phone/earbuds themselves usually have a mono setting. I use it all the time when only wearing one earbud. Beatles songs are notorious for splitting vocals to one ear only.

The solution is already right there. But let me guess, "No, I want to use my old wired earbuds from 1995 and they should accommodate me in my archaic niche use case instead of me upgrading my earbuds to enjoy the new features developed like forced mono"?

Ok, so what is the exact process that creates consciousness? Cus that's what I'm saying is debated but you apparently have that answer. So what EXACTLY, down to the atomic level, is consciousness? What processes and how do they emerge into consciousness?

I'll be waiting for your exact, undebated answer.

"what property is altered"

Ummm, the part where you are a continuous object that is suddenly disassembled.

Dont be intentionally obtuse. Yes, this is a ship of thesis type problem, but there's a very clear point when you stop being "you" - when you're a stream of atoms. Although many versions of a teleporter don't transmit the atoms, only the data of how they're arranged. In that case, you are very distinctly a photocopy, as no original atoms remain.

In the case of atom transfer, you stop being you during the time you are a bundle of atoms with no consciousness. Some people believe we're like a forever stew and if you shut it down like that and reboot it, it's not the "same" stew anymore because it wasn't just the emergence of the consciousness, but the specific emergence itself. Essentially You v1 died in its sleep and You v2 seamlessly took it's place without knowing. Tho that line of thought could applied to sleeping and loss of consciousness during surgery.

All of this is to say it's not a cut and dry answer and people claiming there's a diffinitive, clear cut answer are incorrect. It's a complex question that touches on the very nature of our existence and is still hotly debated. Even academics who believe we are purely chemical machines debate exactly how that works.