![](https://slrpnk.net/pictrs/image/20f84a27-e60f-498b-a058-d6e2cee130ba.webp)
![](https://fry.gs/pictrs/image/c6832070-8625-4688-b9e5-5d519541e092.png)
That’s where you’re wrong, buddy. It’s actually very easy to blame Microsoft for holding a decades-long desktop monopoly by pushing manufacturers to include Windows on every PC out of the box.
That’s where you’re wrong, buddy. It’s actually very easy to blame Microsoft for holding a decades-long desktop monopoly by pushing manufacturers to include Windows on every PC out of the box.
People really be out here preloading their computer with viruses to get around Microsoft’s latest bullshit instead of just using Linux, we ain’t never gonna have the Year of the Linux Desktop
Whatever you get for your NAS, make sure it’s CMR and not SMR. SMR drives do not perform well in NAS arrays.
I just want to follow this up and stress how important it is. This isn’t “oh, it kinda sucks but you can tolerate it” territory. It’s actually unusable after a certain point. I inherited a Synology NAS at my current job which is used for backup storage, and my job was to figure out why it wasn’t working anymore. After investigation, I found out the guy before me populated it with cheapo SMR drives, and after a certain point they just become literally unusable due to the ripple effect of rewrites inherent to shingled drives. I tried to format the array of five 6TB drives and start fresh, and it told me it would take 30 days to run whatever “optimization” process it performs after a format. After leaving it running for several days, I realized it wasn’t joking. During this period, I was getting around 1MB/s throughput to the system.
Do not buy SMR drives for any parity RAID usage, ever. It is fundamentally incompatible with how parity RAID (RAID5/6, ZFS RAID-Z, etc) writes across multiple disks. SMR should only be used for write-once situations, and ideally only for cold storage.
We don’t believe that at all, we believe privacy is a human right.
That’s just a different way to phrase what I said about defending the good side of encryption.
Offline uncensored LLMs already exist, and will perpetually exist
I didn’t say they don’t exist, I said that the help and harm aren’t inseparable like with encryption.
We don’t defend tools doing harm, we acknowledge it.
“My point is that if you want to have a consistent view point, you need to acknowledge and defend the harmful sides.”
If you want to walk it back, fine, but don’t pretend like you didn’t say it.
What the fuck is this “you should defend harm” bullshit, did you hit your head during an entry level philosophy class or something?
The reason we defend encryption even though it can be used for harm is because breaking it means you can’t use it for good, and that’s far worse. We don’t defend the harm it can do in and of itself; why the hell would we? We defend it in spite of the harm because the good greatly outweighs the harm and they cannot be separated. The same isn’t true for LLMs.
Incredibly funny story, incredibly awful website.