Nephil Thief

Yaaaay someone noticed this thread! w00t!

ZyXEL C1000Z modem/router

How's the firmware on that thing? Still being updated? Or did you replace it with e.g. OpenWRT?

To be honest I don't trust router firmware very much. It might have a smaller code base than e.g. IPFire's Linux kernel, but it gets outdated fast (especially if it's Linux based). And old routers tend to not get firmware updates at all.

a /29 of IPv4 addrsses statically assigned... internal 4-port gigabit switch

Separate subnets, right? I should do that at some point. There was one memorable occasion when flying-dutchman was compromised - compiling stuff with GCC that I didn't order, while I was away from keyboard - and I think that happened via one of the Windows PCs, which was also very obviously compromised. (Tiny little binaries on the C: drive that drew all red flags on VirusTotal.)

Since implementing outbound iptables rules on doomguard I've not seen any more compromises on my network, but that could be coincidental; I should still put the Windows boxes on a different subnet just in case. I'd need another switch for that though, and probably have to mess with the wiring a lot.

(Alternative would be using wireless and wired for separate LANs. That might be more feasible, what with the laptops. I'm not really a fan of wireless though.)

OMG. This is amazing. I don't think I can properly convey how impressive a feat this is.

Re Linux, WinForms should work under Mono; though I'm not sure what (if any) changes that might entail. OSX I have no idea about.

Edit: oh wait this uses XNA, which I am totally unfamiliar with. I'm guessing it might run under Wine. Probably better to just whip up a virtual machine though.

... yeaaaah. That sounds more than a bit icky. I think I'll stick with the minimally bloody 2D tile-based gameplay, thanks.

@Slartibus

Very much agreed re not judging/condemning people over it. OTOH I feel like the other direction has to be emphasized too: just because something should not be punishable, it does not follow that it's morally acceptable. When one tacitly and knowingly supports imperialistic warfare (for one example), that is a kind of corruption.

Edit: to be clear though, I don't feel it's my business to take inventory of "how complicit" other people are; I just thought it was kind of needful to point out the above.

For me, right now: mostly

1. Finding freelance work

2. Teaching myself how to program

3. Getting more involved in activism

4. Finding medical insurance that isn't rubbish

(@gem helper - seriously, best of luck to you. I can't even imagine.)

@Neb: guilt isn't the point. (In retrospect, my comment about a "guilty system" was probably a poor choice of words.) The point, IMO, is recognizing that seemingly small aspects of behavior also carry ethical weight; and can cumulatively contribute to the world being a better place, or a worse one.

(Noting also that the US, at least, seems addicted to the Big Man school of history; which is, more or less, a load of rubbish. No person exists in a vacuum.)

But yeah - while one obviously can't make perfect ethical choices every time, it's better to know the situation; so that one can, at the very least, make slightly more informed choices.

(IMO anyway. Frankly my choices are still awful and stupid 99% of the time.)

[Edit: obviously some people do more than just "make slightly more informed choices." Sorry all.]

@Neb - I think gem helper is talking about being complicit, not being *directly* responsible.

e.g. I am complicit in US war crimes - my tax money funds unethical (and often quite frankly illegal) things abroad.

I could refuse to fund my country's drone strikes, use of torture, etc. but then I'd be in prison. The fact that I know this is a problem, and am not behind bars right now, basically says that I'm considering my freedom more important than other people's lives. The best you could say is that I'm banking - and banking very, very hard - on being more useful to humanity while out of jail.

To paraphrase Iain Banks, a guilty system allows no innocence.

There's a difference between blaming yourself for what your ancestors did, or holding yourself responsible for it -- and acknowledging the advantages you've had as a direct result of your ancestors' sins. Presumably, along with that acknowledgement, comes some desire to rectify the situation.

Well yes, that's kind of what the OP was about. Though admittedly I've been doing a bad job of it.

(Disclaimer: I just woke up. I might be a bit discombobulated.)

I'm not really sure how what the situation would be where it isn't racist' date=' really. My family didn't get to the US until around 1905ish and didn't have a thing in the world to do with slavery before they moved here. Forgive me if I don't immediately see the need to apologize for being white just because other people, who were also white, exercised cruelty over those without the power to stop it.[/quote']

 

I think the idea is basically what Slartibus says above - that we tacitly benefit from the behavior of those who were cruel. She's not demanding an apology, she's demanding that we try to fix this problem. I just feel it's incorrect to pin it racially on Europeans rather than on white people. Very nitpicky perhaps, but yeah.

 

OTOH, maybe I shouldn't be nitpicking someone who's been there, done that, because I haven't. I don't know.

@Edgwyn: re Saida Gundy's tweets, I actually do feel like she crosses a certain line when blaming slavery on "Europeans" as a whole. Maybe not racist exactly, but it kind of smacks of biological racialism, which I consider un-Kosher regardless of origin. Also I prefer to be held accountable for my own sins - which are plentiful enough, thanks - rather than the sins of my ancestors.

(Especially seeing as slavery, right now, is a serious global issue that figures into a huge number of supply chains. GoldenGirl started a thread about this once - a thread where, if I recall correctly, I showed a deep lack of scruples myself. Hopefully I've learned better by now.)

So yes, on that, I kind of see where you're coming from.

@Celti

According to the Win32 CBoE code

https://github.com/calref/cboe/blob/master/Win32/game/boe.combat.cpp

ammo-less missiles still use MODE_FIRING, so they would use the Archery skill in CBoE. Not sure how that works in E3 though.

I have yet to see how two wrongs make a right. Methods do matter. Racism, classism, sexism, etc are simply wrong no matter where you are in the power structure.

Can't say I disagree. However...

Also, any attempt to define the power structure in terms of race maybe mildly accurate in a statistical point of view, but it is grossly inaccurate on an individual basis. We do after all have a President who happens to be African American (individually most powerful person in country) who if he were racist would be in a position to do a great deal of damage on that basis.

You're engaging in tokenism there. Please don't do that. As you say, two wrongs don't make a right.

Based on her tweets, I would classify Dr. Gundy as a racist. There are many who give her a pass on racism because of her skin color. I think that they are wrong. Not that it matters to my point of view, but for those who say that only those with power can be racists, as a professor, she is in a position of authority, with relatively little accountability.

To be honest I don't do Twitter at all. (Colossal waste of time in my experience...) I'll take a look.

Edit: err wait, what? Who's "Dr. Gundy"? Who are you talking about?

Edit 2: actually no I won't take a look. Whoever you're talking about, she doesn't need me to declare her not-racist.

"Political tool" is very much the point here, I think. Society skews massively one way; some people are deliberately changing the language because they want to skew it a bit the other way, so it's less horribly unfair. I don't really see a problem with that.

Edit: also IMO, that they're willing to use such political tools should be a good measure of how (rightfully) unhappy they are.

Because I needed to start a happier, less controversial topic...

What does your home network look like?

Mine is as follows...

doomguard (gateway/firewall)

I give the "doomguard" designation to the current firewall machine. Right now it's a headless Acer Aspire 3680 - headless because the screen was damaged a few years back. It runs IPFire (x86/PAE).

flying-dutchman (laptop)

A Compaq C700 laptop, running OpenSUSE 13.2 (x64) on a 120 GB SSD. I'm still not sure if the SSD was worthwhile, though it at least makes running KDE feasible.

harvest-lore (workstation)

Custom AMD A4 workstation with 8 GB of RAM, also running OpenSUSE 13.2 x64. This is what I use for work and freelancing, experimentation of all sorts, and any VM hosting (it's the only machine in the house with hardware virtualization support).

sulfras (test backup server)

This is actually an Eee 1005HAB netbook, formerly known as grayarea; I'm using it to test some network backup software (currently BackupPC). This is working quite well, even with wimpy hardware.

thistledown (old desktop)

An archaic Powerspec 1405, single-core desktop with 1 GB of RAM and no SATA support. It still provides an okay desktop experience, with Xfce or Mate, especially if you use Linux software RAID. But I'm mainly thinking of making it the "production" backup server for the whole network; with the help of a PCI SATA controller, and some large hard drives. At that point I will probably rechristen it as time-hound.

defiant (laptop)

The only laptop that I have a Windows 7 license for. It's a ~2007 issue HP laptop, largely identical to flying-dutchman, but without the SSD. I barely ever use it.

There's also another Linux desktop, vesuvius; and a couple of nameless Windows 7 PCs.

...

Oh, trivia:

* doomguard was originally a gift from my parents for college, before I went off to UMass.

* flying-dutchman and defiant were from friends who had upgraded.

* I bought sulfras a week into my first job. Not exactly money well spent...

* harvest-lore was a cheap kit from Newegg. It replaces the original, a used dual-core Dell workstation, which had suffered a spontaneous motherboard failure.

* thistledown was bought in ~2004 to replace the original, a Powerspec 1420 destroyed by a close lightning strike.

I've never been able to see the insistence on using the word racism to apply exclusively towards systemic racism as anything but a wholly pedantic grab towards rhetorical control.

That's exactly what it is, and there's a point to that IMO. The point is focusing the attention on what is actually the relevant social problem. I mean, sure, you could have a different (and equally nasty) social order, but right now we don't.

@Kelandon

I had a post but the board eated it... Let's try again:

a. Guilt doesn't really enter into it right now, and in any case my supposed guilt is not your business.

b. Bias != racism. Racism serves the white supremacist power structure, which Sindu is not doing in that article.

I've read people insisting that it's actually impossible for non-white people to be racist, and they get a lot of attention in doing so. It frightens me because I want to be an ally but there are too many vocal people who will shout me down if I say anything.

I've honestly given up trying to be "an ally", I'll settle for just not being a total jerk; and maybe doing the right thing on rare occasions. Fact is I'm just not a very nice person.

My advice, though, is: don't look for the position of "being an ally." That will drive you (and other people) bananas. Just try to be nice to people.

Then again, my advice should be taken with many, many grains of salt.

Re being shouted down, I'm guessing you're familiar with that feeling. Probably so are the people who might do the shouting. I don't really have much useful to say there, just the observation that there are social stresses for everyone.

Is a culture not entitled to the sweat of its brow?

 

No. It belongs to everyone.

In principle I agree. In practice, this outlook is somewhat clouded by social, political, and economic power disparities... To put it very mildly indeed.

No, it wasn't you, it was the subject in general combined with aforementioned mental and physical illness giving me hell these past several days.

Okay - I should probably have warnings when I post links to really ranty articles though.

Hope you feel better soonish.

(BTW: been there, done that. I recently wasted three or four years of my life in OCD-and-clinical-depression-land. If you want to rant, well, I'm here.)

Tevildo: Urk.

 

<snip>

Ouch. Sorry. Hope I didn't trigger any anxieties.

The way I see it though, I should be listening to what these people have to say. I mean, you don't have to, that's your business; but I should. I should at least listen, even if at the end of the day I still don't agree with all of it.

Alright, I should have searched this a while ago instead of asking whiny question. Live and learn.

http://www.blackgirl...-appropriation/

^^^ This actually makes it pretty clear which of my written universes are definitely appropriate, and which may be alright.

Likewise

http://www.blackgirl...black-art-free/

^^^ How to at least not be a total unrepentant jerk toward other people's cultures.

I would change the Redskins name. It's not like plenty of other professional sports teams haven't changed their names, especially in the DC area (e.g. Bullets/Wizards, Expos/Nationals). That said, I do not see the Florida State Seminoles, Atlanta Braves, Kansas City Chief or Cleveland Indians as a problem, as long as the logos/mascots are done in a respectful manner, which hasn't always been the case.

How exactly does one "respectfully" use someone else's ethnic identity as a sports mascot? Especially while being a citizen of the country that tried to wipe them out? I'm trying to see your perspective on this - honest - but the "respectful" part seems pretty iffy to me.

—Alorael, who thinks a similar quick litmus test works on a lot of things. Could what you are saying offend? Could you say it in a way that does not without losing the meaning you intend to convey? If the answers are yes and yes, you really ought to.

Err, problem there: the intended meaning is what's offensive.

Edit: especially given the context. Native American peoples were the victims of a genocide. Using that name for a sports team, and claiming there is "honor" in that, is tremendously insulting when one thinks about it.

Therefore the intent is important. Minstrel show bad due to stereotypical intent. "White" person doing rap okay 90% of the time as long as they do not use certain language.

[bolding mine]

Funnily enough, I read an article today that was very critical of that perspective. The author's opinion was that making a big deal about intent is, by its nature, implicitly privileging the person who commits whatever offense. It's talking about the offender's feelings as the main thing, rather than the impact of their actions - i.e. in this case, the feelings of the person or people they hurt.

I mean, it's not like intent doesn't matter at all - especially the first time around, when ignorance may figure in - but when you think about it, "I didn't mean to hurt you!" doesn't make the cut in a lot of cases.

So: a week since the OP. We've recapitulated the basics of whiteness theory, but otherwise I don't see much in terms of opinions on appropriation. Maybe just as well, I don't know. I may be looking in the wrong place.

For my part, I'm considering not making my fiction writings publicly available, anyway. I never really was interested in publishing for money - by all accounts I've read, this is a huge pain. And it's not like the world needs yet another rich white dude SF writer.

People can be as dishonest or disrespectful as they want to be. It's fine that people sometimes want to be those things. It is not immoral to be dishonest or disrespectful when you don't hurt anyone by doing so.

Vehemently disagree. IMO the principle matters - in part because you can't always be sure you're not hurting someone.

Hurt feelings, while often persuasive(either becasue of empathy or because people hurt your feelings for doing things they don't like), do not count for moral purposes.

I think it's very much a matter of degree, and also of pervasiveness. Verbal abuse hurts. Being systematically bullied hurts. I know that from (bitter) personal experience, and what I've dealt with is relatively not even that bad.

There's a difference between being offended or mildly embarrassed, and being made to feel humiliated or outright threatened. The latter far outweighs the former. Especially when it happens on a systematic basis.

Also IMO, while individual cases of appropriation may not do much harm, case after case can function to retroactively whitewash history. See for instance the "Harlem Shake" example mentioned in the article above.

the record labels tend to exercise a pretty heavy degree of creative control over what they produce and market, too. so yeah, being noticed by a big label isn't necessarily a triumph in terms of either material success or artistic freedom

Suddenly, the stuff I've heard on Top 20 radio stations makes a frightening amount of sense.