ragebutt

joined 1 week ago
[–] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Easy to install too, if you’re comfortable working in a fusebox

[–] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Works from db0, congrats

[–] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 2 days ago

lmao when have tech companies ever given a semblance of a shit about consent. It’s an industry that has deep roots in misogynistic nerds and drunk frat bros

[–] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 days ago

Oh I didn’t mean larger like that, I meant width wise. Standard rack width is 19 inches so if it’s one of those specialty racks that’s narrower that thing I said about repurposing an old 1u/2u is pointless because it won’t fit. Doesn’t mean you can’t or shouldn’t use this rack, just that that idea is no good.

4u is fine unless you want to expand down the line. Networking gear and stuff. However if it’s a narrow rack I don’t think there will be much to put in it for those purposes? Depends on your goals. I have a larger rack but I also have my whole networking stack in it, switch, poe switch, ups, router, nas, etc.

I would consider posting on the unraid forums. There may be someone who has used similar hardware and can give guidance on how they approached the setup. The benefit of unraid is ultimately that the support community is very solid

[–] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 3 days ago (2 children)

How do you connect the drives? Looking at specs there’s only one sata port (which I don’t actually see anywhere, but it says it is there, although using it slows the second nvme lane)

USB connected drives in a raid array are not ideal. USB connectivity is not as solid as a direct sata connection and a drive suddenly disappearing from your area, especially parity, is quite a headache

No pci slot so you can’t add an hba for more sata lanes either. You could do one of those nvme to sata things but I’ve heard bad things about the reliability of those.

If it’s free though I def think it’s worth finding a way to make it work. The specs are more than enough for unraid and usually those tiny pcs are pretty power efficient, which is nice. But that’s the issue to work around, connecting the hard drives reliably.

WRT what to put them in it could be anything really. You could get a cheap broken 1 or 2u server case where someone’s pulled the motherboard and powersupply, rig something in there to hold them all. Should be more than enough space for 5 drives and will probably have cages for at least 2-3, maybe all 5 if you get lucky. Might even have hot swap ones. Dunno if this would fit though, that rack looks small and I couldn’t get the specs to load, is it full sized or a tiny one?

Could also see if there’s some kind of 3d print thing. There’s probably a 3d print thing to rack mount that mini pc.

[–] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Yeah also not paying which is why after like 10 or 15 or however many queries I get pushed to the older model for like 6 hours

Hopefully this implies they’re working to remove bias from their models but I don’t know if I buy that.

It’s also trained on garbage data so maybe that’s the case. like having a discussion about ethics, especially corporate ethics, with chatgpt is wild. It will openly advocate for a lack of transparency and accountability basically because companies deserve that right because it’s the law and therefore their right to mislead consumers about potential harm or whatever. Baby’s first ethics class will tell you the law and ethics don’t always align.

I don’t think this is a “they are inserting propaganda into chatgpt” thing though, I think it’s just that the models are trained on garbage news articles and reddit posts that dicksuck corporations and not enough actual literature about ethics. It will confuse and correct itself if you ask even basic follow-up questions as a result

[–] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 3 days ago (3 children)

ChatGPT is hard to gauge because it depends on what model you get. I’m rate limited at the moment so I get the slightly older model

Do Palestinians deserve to be free ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT The question of whether Palestinians deserve to be free is deeply complex and tied to issues of human rights, justice, and international law. Many believe that Palestinians, like all people, deserve self-determination, freedom, and the right to live in peace and security. The aspiration for freedom is a fundamental human right recognized in global conventions.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with its historical and political dimensions, has led to differing perspectives on this issue. Some argue for the right of Palestinians to have an independent state, while others emphasize the need for peace that respects the rights of both Palestinians and Israelis.

Ultimately, the question involves a broader conversation about justice, equity, and the pursuit of lasting peace in a region marked by decades of conflict.

Do Israelis deserve to be free ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT Yes, Israelis, like all people, deserve to be free. The right to freedom, security, and self-determination is a fundamental human right for all people, regardless of nationality or ethnicity. Israelis have the right to live in peace, safety, and dignity, just as Palestinians and others around the world do.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is incredibly complex, and it involves the rights, identities, and aspirations of both Israelis and Palestinians. It’s important to recognize that both groups have a right to self-determination and peaceful coexistence. Peace and justice for both Israelis and Palestinians are crucial for achieving a future where all people in the region can live without fear or oppression.

Sooooooo maybe something they’re shifting. Or maybe something that is modified based on your specific data set. I’m logged in with a burner account

[–] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 25 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Not shocking to hear, he’s a scumbag at heart. But now if you say that people will be like “uhhh how can you say that he’s donated so much money”

Then when you point out he’s donated literally 0% of his overall current net worth, his past (and current, apparently) behavior has arguably as much humanity if not more than he has offset, etc you’ll get whataboutism. “What have you done??”

I don’t want philanthropy to be contingent on the whims of billionaires. Gates has done a lot but it still has major issues, there is no real transparency, and it’s still authoritatively controlled because he has a great deal of influence over his foundation. The even bigger issue is that he is by far the exception. Other billionaires donate minimally only to maximize tax benefits and only to issues they have been personally impacted by.

The other day I was with people who were watching a football game. The eagles won and I asked why the owner gets to speak first at the trophy ceremony, let alone at all, given it was the teams effort. This led to a whole discussion but one thing that came up was how he donates so much money to autism research because he has a grandson with autism. This was meant to appeal to me because I have a background working in autism research and I work with people with autism a lot.

all I could think is “how fucked up is it that we have to hope that an obscenely rich person personally experiences the issue for them to decide to bequeath funding?” This inherently means that things with a much higher rate of prevalence, like autism (1 in 36, roughly) or dementia (prevalence varies widely by age range (2% to 13%) but ~10 million cases per year), will get tons of money. But what about far less common things? I’ve worked with people who have extremely rare conditions. Angelmans syndrome, prader willi, chromosomal deletions, (rates of 1-2 per 10,000) or extremely rare things like hellers syndrome (rates of 1-2 per 100,000).

This is why we fund things like NIMH, so that money can be fairly dispersed to ensure that all things are researched. Teams of people research what needs to be researched. This isn’t even just about equity; sometimes researching lesser known disorders leads to discoveries that are applicable in a broader context

But instead we let a few oligarchs hoard money. Most of them don’t bother to fund this stuff at all and they few that do only bother to do so when it’s something personally relevant to them. We have no say in the matter.

[–] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 91 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (11 children)

80s, 90s, and a few years into early 2000s. Gates ruthlessness lasted decades, destroyed many businesses and lives, and is mostly whitewashed thanks to his philanthropic efforts and a few reddit amas and some secret santa participation

Not to mention the destruction he did to computing as a whole. The nightmare of proprietary bullshit is something that he did not architect but he pushed heavily and lobbied for constantly. He had the position to push for interoperability from an early stake in computing, to set the stage for computers to have a strong precedent to work together. Instead he and microsoft made every effort to work against open standards. They would adopt open standards and extend them with proprietary extensions to intentionally ruin them. A lot of what is infuriating about modern tech can be traced back to precedent that microsoft set at his direction

Reminder despite every donation he has made his net worth is higher now than it ever was and this has essentially always been the case. His philanthropy, while objectively good, is a measured pr effort that does not impact his overall obscene wealth and basically never has

[–] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 3 days ago

He has a history that is highly suspect and it’s absolutely shocking he didn’t get blown up during the metoo era

When he had a practice he had a 19 year old patient. He allegedly molested this patient. He denies these claims. What is undeniably true is that he made this patient an intern at his practice

Because of his inappropriate hiring practices he was required by the licensing board to hire another psychologist to sit in on all of his sessions. This rendered his practice no longer financially viable

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/dr-phil-disciplinary-file-isnt-what-radar-online-makes-it-out-to-be/

This article pushes back against some of the more sensationalized reporting of the time this blew up but (imo) it’s somewhat of an issue to do so. The issue being that a licensing board generally requires a substantial burden of proof even now to substantiate claims like sexual molestation of clients, especially so in 1988 Texas. What I’m saying here is that to the licensing board the sexual molestation claim was likely a “he said, she said” moment, where dr Phil steadfastly denied any wrongdoing and there was no evidence other than the woman’s testimony. Given that the board was probably reticent to issue discipline on this matter out of fear that it would result in legal response from dr phil, and somewhat understandably so as the justice system’s burden of proof for sexual assault victims is often quite high. Essentially if they had say, suspended or even stripped his license over this he could have had this action easily reversed and even sued for damages

This is almost certainly why the licensing board took the action they did. They 100% believed that girl. The requirement to have your sessions monitored by another professional is extremely severe and fairly unprecedented. It is their way of saying “we absolutely do not trust you at all, we know you are a scumbag, but legally we do not have the authority to revoke your ability to practice”. Ethics boards will do things like this: now you, at your expense, have to pay another professional to make sure you don’t groom any more women. And if you try to do so we will have testimony that you did. But most likely you will recognize that we don’t want you around anymore and give up (which he did, for a bit. He even let his license lapse. He is not licensed, to be clear. He has not been in some time). When you do his show you sign a contract saying you are receiving “advice” from some guy and not psychotherapy from a psychologist. I bet they do not make this clear to guests because they probably aren’t big on informed consent.

He found a loophole. Doctor is not a protected title. “Psychologist”, “professional counselor”, “lawyer”, “surgeon”, etc are legally protected titles. If you practice under these titles without the associated licensure and credentials you can go to jail. But if you’ve earned your doctorate and say “I have years of experience” you can do whatever. If Oprah props you up to a national stage that’s fine too, even if your style of “therapy” is not really therapy at all but really just confrontation and bullying. Also they obviously leave out he had to close his practice in disgrace.

That said, he was accused of changing in front of the girl often. And she was quoted as saying:

"He'd be running his hand up and down the inside of my thigh all the way up to my panties. He'd put his hands between my legs. He'd reach in my blouse and touch my breasts. He pulled my breasts out of my bra and kissed them."

So yeah, real piece of shit and not just like “oh he rubbed her shoulders and made her uncomfortable”, though even that would be fucked up and gross. He genuinely sexually assaulted this girl

This is like, day 1 ethics for a therapist. Dual relationships. Clients are clients are clients. You don’t hang out with them, you don’t go to their birthday parties, you don’t friend them on social media, you certainly don’t hire them for a fucking job in your practice. This is in part so you can try to remain impartial as a clinician but mostly to protect clients as there is an inherent power imbalance in this relationship that can easily be taken advantage of (as seen here, plus he was like 38 when all this happened to the 19 year old girl so that power dynamic too)

scumbag

[–] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 4 days ago

atarashii gakko and ano

[–] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 days ago

You bring up a good point. I ultimately oversimplified my post to illustrate the point which upon reflection was probably not the best idea

Your presentation is not uncommon at all. It is totally a thing to fear the needle and not fear the pain. Ultimately the strategies remain the same (which is why I kind of glossed over this but it was still a bad idea to do so, my bad)

In addition to desensitization you can also try diversion in the short term. Create sensations in other areas of your body to divert your focus away from the needle. Put an ice pack on your thigh or something similar that’s not harmful but mildly uncomfortable to pull focus. Similarly you can just go with good old distractions if possible like watching a video while looking away. This isn’t the best strategy, especially long term because in some cases it can worsen the stimulus you’re anxious about, but in a pinch it can be helpful. And of course if your phobia is trauma related processing said trauma is helpful (although that in and of itself is often a desensitization process fyi)

view more: ‹ prev next ›