HappyRedditRefugee

Nobody's stupid enough to

Every sentence that begins this way is wrong.

Nobody is stupid enough to belive that every sentence that begings with "Nobody's stupid enough" is automatically wrong

Im high

We have a development system for python on Windows at work, works very well also.

On linux is one pip install, buy maybe first do a venv^^

Chaos, not anarchy!

I'll coincide with you in that first-aid-quick-repairs is something people should in the best of cases know how to do, but setting a envirental variable or installing a package is not a "simple thing". I've worked with engineers that programmed math models for a living that had no idea what a enviromental varible even was. Yes is easy to do, but the concept behind it, what it is, what it does and why are not simple, without the right background or the will to learn about the topic.

And, about user and owner. Sure, I get your point and personally I share it. But again, that is an opinion, tell a non-interested-user that they don't really own their rig until they know how to use the terminal and I assure you that most of them will disagree.

Edit cause I wrongly posted before finishing: Comparing uncloging -manually pushing and pull a bar- or chaning a light -turn left, change, then right- or a breaker -literally just pulling a tab up- are WAY simpler actions. Yes, running apt upgrade is easy, but how you know is all well? That it work? + if I run apt update everyday I see almost no diference in my system, why should I even do something like that

Ikr? "Since it interest me, it you interest you too"

Do you know how everything in your house works? How to repair everything? No right?

Would you be brave enough to mess with the grounding of your house, or the AC or the heaters, the washing machine, the doors? Not eveyone wants mess with every (subsystem) thing in their house/live"

Most of the people I know want their PC to work and if somwthing goes wrong they just send it to repair or ask somebody else to fix it, they don't wanna do it themselves, which I find normal, they have little to no interesting in PCs, and that is compleatly fine.

And before someone says "Yeah, but the computer won't kill you if you fuck up the fixing or messing, let me tell you, a "sudo rm -r" or "sudo chown -R" can fuck you system BAR, making you loose important data and info.

-...But refugee -I hear you about to type-, they SHOULD have 10921 back-ups in atleast 2542 independent locations. Yo, they don't wanna even see the terminal, and you want them to interest themselves for data integrity and redundacy? Come on.

This whole threat is a HUGE circle jerk and a collection of all the "I USE ARCH BTW" variations imaginable.

"WHY WOULDN'T ALL PEOPLE WANT THE KNOWLEDGE TO CRAFT COMMANDS TO MANIPULATE, FILTER AND SEARCH TEXT IN A WHOLE FILE SYSTEM WITH JUST ONE COMMAND? UNCULTURED PESANTS"

Come, not everyone is a computer nerd, nor everyone ones to optimize 30s in the workflow if it means memorizing a bunch of commands, their syntax and options.

Amazing solution, didn't arrive to that one, I was thinking just making a timing constraint to reveal the number that would make the precaculation practically imposible, but the commitment schmeme is waaaay more elegant.

Not very important, even if generated by a single actor N has not such a big importance. If I were implementing something like this I'd just probably make it -hardcoded-.

If you reaaaallyyyy want to decide on a N on the fly, I'd put a restricction (a<Nx<b) make each participant generate a Nx and then sum then all, -multiply'em If you wanna be hardcore- But I'd be tricky to get it right, for example a party might be able to consistently make N whatever the max value of N is by making their Nx very big -Which, well, I don't really know how it would benefit that party and how would they exploit it-. Maybe using a operation like a XOR on the Nx would be robust enough, and would mitigate the kind of attack that I described above

Tl;dr: you can just have a random party generate it.

1. Decide on a random N and what tails (even) and heads (uneven) mean.

2. Each party generates a random number

3. Combine the numbers with a conmutative operation of some sort, the harder the operation the better.

4. Take the hash N times. (Can be done independently by each participant)

(4.5) optional: for extra robustness, do some hard-to-calculate transformations to the result of 4. (Can be done independently by each party)

5. The final result is either uneven or even === coin toss. (0 will be treathed as even*.*)

This is not infalibe, one party could get all the numbers a precalculate a answer to get a specific result but they will need to randomly try numbers. adding some timing constrains, using big numbers and hard operations would make that sort of attack not really practicable.

Nice question, had fun thinking about it!

Hmmm... I never said that. You're misreprensenting my words.

Maybe what I meant is that there should be clear and hard rules for gun ownership? Maybe I did mean that only him should not be able to own one, perhaps I even meant that only people I agree with shoud own guns. Is not possible to for you to know what I generally believe about ownership and regulation only from my comment above. So please do not put words in my mouth.

Also, bold statement comming from someone with a clear wink to Anarchy in their handle.

Man, that is some concerning shit, pardon my french. Really concerning shit.

Im just speachless tbh. I talk a lot, you can see it in this threat, but I can only say about that, that it is some very concerning shit.

Does he fancy himself to be Batman or what?