• 10 Posts
  • 1.5K Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 10th, 2024

help-circle

  • Right, but my point is that the amount of effort required to just get the multikernel fully running on quirky phone hardware is quite a lot, and then you have to set up a lot of plumbing for both userspaces to communicate across kernels (i.e. you’ll have to write driver shims for a lot of things). It is probably easier to port software to ubports.



  • First of all, AFAIR it only really works on x86 for now. Besides, I don’t see much benefit in running two kernels side-by-side like this in this situation, you would once again have to run a lot of services twice (eating up RAM) and you don’t even get any security benefits in return. The only slight benefit is better software compatibility on a newer kernel but in all likelyhood it’s easier to backport the software to the old kernel, rather than get this exceptionally weird multikernel setup running on already quirky phone hardware.



  • Extremely theoretically - yes. You could run other kernels in VMs with hardware passthru. Not docker, because that’s containerization that runs on the host kernel, but something like QEMU.

    Realistically - no, there is no support for this, I don’t think it’s planned, and I don’t think it would be useful anyways. Old phone hardware which pmOS currently supports doesn’t do hardware virtualization well in the first place. Even if it did, getting all the hardware passthru working right is extremely non-trivial, and performance would probably be horrible because of constricted RAM.


  • balsoft@lemmy.mltoLinux@lemmy.mlsystemd(ont)
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Honestly for desktop usage it doesn’t really matter. All inits have their idiosyncrasies (“A stop job is running for Session”/logging hell on openrc/etc). But for managing a fleet of bare-metal servers I find systemd to be the best, most polished one out of the lot.


  • I’ve grown into a firm believer of Sunday–Saturday

    I’m curious as to why. Obviously it doesn’t really matter. I can’t think of any arguments for Sunday–Saturday, and the only argument I have for Monday–Sunday is that in that case the “weekend” is actually the end of the week, rather than awkwardly split up. But then the word for “weekend” is different in different languages, so it’s a very English-specific argument.



  • “This Thursday” is for the Thursday contained within the Sunday–Saturday interval you’re currently in.

    Except according to ISO 8601, Monday is the first day of the week, and it is the definition used in some english-speaking countries (Ireland, occasionally the UK). That means every Sunday there is a definite ambiguity as to which day is “this Thursday”.


  • The nazis absolutely did use social-populist rhetoric and promises on their way to power, and even did implement some nominally “socialist” policies like nationalization of certain war-related industries, public works, price controls, and a large degree of planning. It was also combined with union busting, privatization of other industries, huge deficit spending with intent to reclaim it with war plunder, and other obviously capitalist/imperialist moves, so it wasn’t real economic socialism of course. That said, Magyar’s platform is definitely nowhere near economic socialism either, it’s welfare capitalism at best.


  • Can we stop the idpol a bit?

    No. Combining pseudo-socialist economic policies with conservative social policies is literally national-socialism which you might know by some other names

    He is also campaigning on wealth taxes, fighting back against oligarchs and corporations, anti-corruption, strong social safety nets paid by reclaimed wealth and so on.

    I checked the full election platform and there’s some OK stuff in there (wealth tax, increased pensions, social housing, women’s rights as workers). The rest is liberal policies (e.g. nationalizing bankrupcy and debt foreclosure agencies) and tax cuts for lower and middle class. It is for sure better than Orban but overall it’s not very progressive

    What do you expect a politician to be if not nationalistic?

    Uhhh I want my politicians to support the international working class. I expect them to not be overtly nationalist at a minimum. Internationalism is a thing.

    He is not even staunchly anti-immigration

    He said he liked Orban’s draconian immigration policies and he cracked jokes (or insane slander, hard to tell) at immigrant’s expense

    Same with LGBT rights, in an ideal society it should just be normal and nobody should care, especially not the government.

    Definitely not when the government discriminated and abused LGBT people for decades, propagandized society and stoked hatred against them. It needs to be dealt with and spoken about. We still live in a patriarchy and its victims need protection and support.




  • He’s also extremely nationalist, anti-immigration, and his attitude to LGBT is silence (which is only marginally better than hatred)

    Hes aligned with the EU

    EU is a trading bloc and fascists love money. More extreme ones hate others more than they love money, but it’s not universal.

    aligned with Ukraine, and wants Russia to kick rocks

    There’s nothing stopping fascists from supporting Ukraine, there are plenty of nazis there too. It’s not as bad as russian propaganda makes it out to be but it is a reason why some on the right/far-right support it.

    Hes also talked about unfucking hungary’s courts, media consolidation and electrion rules that the outgoing facist rigged.

    This would be good overall. Whether he follows through with it or just re-fucks the institutions in his favor remains to be seen

    Overall I’d say he’s like a Hungarian Meloni - a fascist (or close to one) willing to cooperate with liberals to make money together.





  • Iran not getting nukes ensures that this war will happen again too. The only ways to keep sovereignty in the face of imperialists are:

    1. Be economically irrelevant (a-la Cuba)
    2. Kick their ass in a land war so hard that they are scared to even try (a-la Vietnam)
    3. Have nukes (a-la North Korea)

    If you don’t have any of those three you’re bound to be coup’d by US-backed fascists at some point, see: history of South America and West Asia.

    Iran has oil and control over the straight of Hormuz, so (1) is out of the question. (2) is more likely but I’m not sure if the US leadership is dumb enough yet to just go head first into another land war in asia, and in any case this would lead to hundreds of thousands of dead civilians. This leaves us with (3) as the most viable strategy.