VRAM would be 810Gb/403Gb/203Gb for FP16/FP8/INT4 for interferrence, according to their website.
I'm not sure what "FP16/FP8/INT4" means, and where would GTX 4090 fall in those categories, but the VRAM required is respectively 810Gb/403Gb/203Gb. I guess 4090 would fall under the INT4?
If you are interested in code completion, I recommend taking a look at https://refact.ai/. Hosting it (last time I tried) was almost painless, setting up docker to work with your GPU takes some time, but is pretty ok-ishly documented on NVIDIA page, and then you just run a docker and it worked.
It runs a server you can connect to i.e with a VSCode plugin, that will provide code completion or a chatbot (depending on what model you run), and it also has an option to let it loose on your project. You set training hours, give it a git repo (or a zipfile with whole project), and it starts training, which should tailor it towards giving more relevant code completion in the context of the project. I'm not sure if you can do that for the chatbot models, though.
However, I was trying it on my spare gaming PC turned server, that has an unused NVIDIA 1060, and while I could run some smaller models, I wasn't able to get the training working - the 6Gb of VRAM simply aren't enough for that. I also tried running it on the PC I work on, but it kept eating like 20-30Gb of RAM for the container, which made it kind of hard to also do anything else on the PC.
However, if you have a spare PC/server with good GPU that can run it, I'd say it's one of the better ways how to get personalized code completion, that keeps your data local and secure.
As a side note, I think you can give it API keys and let it use online models, but that would kind of defeat the point.
They should have just add more rainbows to the skin, and make it as gay as possible.
I mean, if it's **just ** a normal screen-sized website, that already makes it a lot easier. Not having to deal with responsiveness bullshit would make webdev a lot better experience. That is assuming "normal screen" means 1920*1080, or whatever is the median screen size.
Heh, guess it's really only your national tragedy. Keep your secrets, then.
Not only they didn't bother, but kept actively trying to suck Putin's dick the whole time.
One important thing about CS was that it's also marked as a boot-start driver. That flag tells the OS that it can't boot without it no matter what happens, aside from safe mode, and iirc if your driver doesn't have that flag, which drivers probably shouldnt have, from how I understand it if such a boot loop would happen due to a faulty non-boot-start driver, the system will recognize that and simply disable it.
What stops you from tampering with the game folder, and changing the function that sends the hash, to send a pre-calculated and valid value, instead of calculating it from real files you are running?
Isn't that, like, illegal?
- OrangePi with HomeAssistant and PiHole.
- Old gaming PC turned 24/7 server with Jellyfin, V-Rising server
- Hetzner cloud with Matrix server for Messenger and Discord bridging.
- Synology NAS for SMB and sharing stuff with others through Synology Drive, which also serves as a seedbox for Redacted.ch, with Headphones and Transmission.
I might be wrong, but from how I understand it it probably wouldn't help. Kernel drivers have a rigorous QA and cert by Microsoft if you want to get them signed, which is a process that may take a long time - longer than you can afford when pushing updates to AV/EDR to catch emerging threats. What Crowdstrike does to bypass this requirement is that the CS Falcon is just an engine, that loads, interprets and executes code from definition files. The kernel driver code then doesn't need to change, so no need for new MS cert, and they can just push new definition files. So, they kind of have to deal with unsafe in this case, since you are executing a new code.
I'm not. I vaguely remember seeing it in some posts and comments, and it would explain it pretty well, so I kind of took it as a likely outcome. In hindsight, You are right, I shouldnt have been spreading hearsay. Thanks for the wakeup call, honestly!
We found a RCE on a server during pentest. In KOBOL.
Learning how to make a reverse shell in KOBOL was pretty unique experience. Thankfully, we found another path to DA ajd didn't have to continue, but maan, learning KOBOL, especially of your use-case is niche, is borderline esoteric.
I see a lot of hate ITT on kernel-level EDRs, which I wouldn't say they deserve. Sure, for your own use, an AV is sufficient and you don't need an EDR, but they make a world of difference. I work in cybersecurity doing Red Teamings, so my job is mostly about bypassing such solutions and making malware/actions within the network that avoids being detected by it as much as possible, and ever since EDRs started getting popular, my job got several leagues harder.
The advantage of EDRs in comparison to AVs is that they can catch 0-days. AV will just look for signatures, a known pieces or snippets of malware code. EDR, on the other hand, looks for sequences of actions a process does, by scanning memory, logs and hooking syscalls. So, if for example you would make an entirely custom program that allocates memory as Read-Write-Execute, then load a crypto dll, unencrypt something into such memory, and then call a thread spawn syscall to spawn a thread on another process that runs it, and EDR would correlate such actions and get suspicious, while for regular AV, the code would probably look ok. Some EDRs even watch network packets and can catch suspicious communication, such as port scanning, large data extraction, or C2 communication.
Sure, in an ideal world, you would have users that never run malware, and network that is impenetrable. But you still get at avarage few % of people running random binaries that came from phishing attempts, or around 50% people that fall for vishing attacks in your company. Having an EDR increases your chances to avoid such attack almost exponentionally, and I would say that the advantage it gives to EDRs that they are kernel-level is well worth it.
I'm not defending CrowdStrike, they did mess up to the point where I bet that the amount of damages they caused worldwide is nowhere near the amount damages all cyberattacks they prevented would cause in total. But hating on kernel-level EDRs in general isn't warranted here.
Kernel-level anti-cheat, on the other hand, can go burn in hell, and I hope that something similar will eventually happen with one of them. Fuck kernel level anti-cheats.
Why does this need to be installed here when previously agentless technologies was sufficient
As someone who works in offensive Cybersecurity doing Red Teamings, where most of my job is to bypass and evade such solutions, I can say that bypassing agent less technologies is so much easier than agented ones. While you can access most of the logs remotely, having an agent helps you extremely with catching 0-day malware, since you can scan memory (that one is a bitch to bypass and usually how we get caught), or hook syscalls which you can then correlate.
Oh, an unknown unsigned process just called RWX memory allocation, loaded a crypto binary, and spawned a thread in another process that's trying to execute it? Better scan that memory and see what it's up to. That is something you cannot do remotely.
From what I've heard, didn't the issue happen not solely because of CS driver, but because of a MS update that was rolled out at the same time, and the changes the update made caused the CS driver to go haywire? If that's the case, there's not much MS or CS could have done to test it beforehand, especially if both updates rolled out at around the same time.
From what I've heard and to play a devil's advocate, it coincidented with Microsoft pushing out a security update at basically the same time, that caused the issue. So it's possible that they didn't have a way how to test it properly, because they didn't have the update at hand before it rolled out. So, the fault wasn't only in a bug in the CS driver, but in the driver interaction with the new win update - which they didn't have.
I wouldn't call Crowdstrike a corporate spyware garbage. I work as a Red Teamer in cybersecurity, and EDRs are bane of my existence - they are useful, and pretty good at what they do. In the last few years, I'm struggling more and more to with engagements we do, because EDRs just get in the way and catch a lot of what would pass undetected a month ago. Staying on top of them with our tooling is getting more and more difficult, and I would call that a good thing.
I've recently tested a company without EDR, and boy was it a treat. Not defending Crowdstrike, to call that a major fuckup is great understatement, but calling it "corporate spyware garbage" feels a little bit unfair - EDRs do make a difference, and this wasn't an issue with their product in itself, but with irresponsibility of their patch management.
EDIT: Fake screenshot about some facts from the Palworld development, very loosely based on a really interesting blog post from the dev that's linked in the post body.
UPDATE: So, apparently it's mostly fake, taken from this article [translation] (where they even mention some kind of VCS).
However, even though it's not as absurd, it's a great read and a pretty wholesome story, so I recommend reading the article instead. And I'm even more convinced that this studio really does not deserve any of the hate they are getting.
Here is my summary of some of the interesting points from the article:
PocketPair started as a three man studio, passionate about game development, that couldn't find an investor for their previous games even though they've had really fleshed out prototypes, to the point where they just said "Game business sucks, we'll make it and release it on our own terms", and started working on games without any investor.
They couldn't hire professionals due to budget constraints. The guy responsible for the animations was a random 20-yo guy they found on Twitter, where he was posting his gun reload animations he self-learned to do and was doing for fun, while working as a store clerk few cities over.
They had no prior game development experience, and the first senior engineer, and first member of the team who actually was a professional game developer, was someone who ranomly contacted them due to liking Craftopia. But he didn't have experience with Unity, only Unreal, so they just said mid-development "Ok, we'll just throw away all we have so far, and we'll switch to Unreal - if you're willing to be a lead engineer, and will teach us Unreal from scratch as we go."
They had no budget. They literally said "Figuring out budget is too much additional work, and we want to focus on our game. Our budget plan is "as long as our account isn't zero, and if it reaches zero, we can always just borrow more money, so we don't need a budget".
For major part of the development, they had no idea you can rig models and share animations between them, and were doing everything manually for each of the model, until someone new came to the team and said "Hey, you know there's an easier way??"
It's a miracle this game even exists as it is, and the developer team sound like someone really passionate about what they are doing, even against all the odds.
This game is definitely not some kind of cheap cash-grab, trying to milk money by copying someone else's IP, and they really don't deserve all the hate they are receiving for it.
How did my domain password get into Windows Credential Storage?
Hello!
I've recently stumbled upon an amazing blog about getting credentials from Bitwarden vault through DPAPI and Windows Credential Storage, and what suprised me is that any low-privileged process can just ask for all information in Credential Storage, without requiring any user input (the article discusses it in the second half, even though the first half is about abusing DA credentials), through the CredEnumerateW WinApi call.
Since that vector was pretty interresting, I tried running their PoC for listing the cred storage on my, and several colleague machines, and was surprised that every machine had domain account credentials listed in plaintext, that could be grabbed by any low-privileged process just by calling this WinAPI.
I suspected that it's because of Outlook or Teams, because I found articles from few years ago mentioning that they do get saved there. However, one colleague did not have his credentials there, even though he was using Teams and Outlook, and had his password saved.
So, how did that password get there? Why most people we tried the PoC with do have a domain password saved, but some do not? Or is it because of Windows Hello? I'd love to get some kind of solution/recommendation about how to avoid having your password, in plaintext, in such an insecure space. Or was I dumb enough to save it into Edge somwhere, and have promptly forgotten about it?
And more importantly - how this isn't a pretty severe vulnerability, and is considered "as designed" by Microsoft? The fact that any process can just ask for your credentials is mind-blowing, plus it isn't even detected by EDRs we've tried it with when discussing it with our SoC.
What distro you use/recommend as a daily driver for a Cybersecurity job (pentesting and Red Teaming)? Would QubeOS be a good fit?
Hello!
I'm working as a pentester/RT Operator in a cybersecurity company, which for some reason is a Windows shop, so we are mostly forced to work within VMWare VMs, WSL and similar. However, I've recently found out that we can in fact dualboot or reinstall our laptops, so I'm now looking for a good setup or recommended distros to use.
When I last tried switching to Fedora, my main issue was that since we are deeply integrated into O365, and our Exchange server isn't configured to allow 3rd party apps (and we can't create app passwords), accessing Teams, Mail or just writing reports in Office was a struggle. And another issue was the fact that our PT VPN is Checkpoint, which I did not manage to get working on Linux.
I'm of course familiar with Kali/Parrot/BlackArch, but I would not consider those fitting for a daily driver - each engagement can get pretty messy, and I think it's better to start with a fresh VM for every customer, just to avoid any potential issues.
I've recently discovered QubeOS, which in theory sounds like it should be perfect for this usecase - you can easily separate data for different customers, keep them safe in a storage qube, deal with per-customer networking/different VPNs in their respective Kali VM qubes, and spin up a Windows qube for report writing and backoffice/administration/communication. And if I really understand it correctly, it should also be possible to easily test out malware in a separate disposable qube without much risk.
But I didn't try working with QubeOS yet, so all of this is just a theory based on my understanding of it's features and usecases.
So, my question would be - what kind of setup do you use for engagements and backoffice/administrative work? What distro would you recommend, that works well with running different VMs without it being too much of a hassle? And most importantly, is there anyone who uses QubeOS in this field of work, or will it only slow me down and make everything a lot harder than it should be?
Thank you!
We've had this Slack emoji ever since we started porting a Unity project and dealing with their bugs or support. I think it's pretty fitting now.
I think now is the best time to share it. Unfortunately we're using it way more than we would like.
What do you think would be an actually good use of blockchain/smart contracts? What kind of problems (big or small) is it a good tool for?
Hello!
When I was creating a CTF for a conference, I've finally got to learn about how blockchain and smart contracts actually works in practice, and the whole concept is simply brilliant. A quick introduction for those unfamiliar with it would be in this summary, but just to summarize how I basically understand it, blockchain is simply a VM that runs code (smart contracts) a both the code, and result of every execution of it is calculated by a bunch of users (so, mining is basically running a VM) and appended into the blockchain based on some kind of consensus and proof of work. This means that you get a single source of truth and history of every execution of a smart contract that is decentralized and you can rely on it.
But, almost every use of blockchain or smart contracts I have seen has pretty large issues either in sustainability in the long term, or in cases where you simply need some form of an authority to prevent and punish misuse. While I'm not really that much familiar with every use of blockchain so far, I will first list what I've already thought about or seen, and the main issues that I think are a deal-breaker for choosing blockchain for that kind of tasks. It's possible that some of the issues are wrong or have already been solved, so please correct me if I'm wrong - my knowledge of blockchain isn't really that in-depth.
First and the most common use is the one you are probably most aware of - cryptocurrencies. If I ignore the biggest and most unfortunate issue of cryptocurrencies turning into an investment-only product, with hugely volatile and inflated price that is not backed by any kind of real value (sure, you can pay with BTC, but it's slow, expensive and super volatile to be useful, so the only real use is to literally sell it to others for a profit - which also basically means you are scamming someone out of their money down the line), I see the following problems with using blockchain for currencies:
- Longevity - The ledger size is already getting massive, only after a few year. It's not sustainable, and it will eventually be really hard to keep the whole ledger at a large enough number of places to not run into problems of integrity. It's growing exponentionally, and is at around 500Gb after around 10 years.
- Gas cost - It's getting harder and harder to mine and confirm new transactions, which increases the cost while also making less people able to mine new transactions without being at a loss. This will only get worse, and eventually lead to the 50% problem (if someone controls 50%+ of mining nodes, he can confirm fake transactions or do whatever he wants with the blockchain) being a real issue.
- Lack of moderation - This may be one of the more controversial issues, because it goes directly against the whole idea of cryptocurrencies, but is one of the biggest problems I see that are in the way of crypto being able to be considered for wider use. We live in a world where some people are dicks that are not afraid to steal and cheat, and something like a currency simply has to be moderatable. You need to be able to punish criminals, and take back what they have stolen. If someone doesn't pay their debts and owns me money, the government should be able to just take the money if they have them. If someone uses an account for scamming and stealing, it should be possible to freeze it.
The last issue will eventually show in most of the other uses of blockchain as well, and while I have included it, I'm still not sure how I feel bout it. In an ideal world, you would not have to deal with something like this. I would also really like to have an option to do my transactions privately, without anyone being able to profile my behavior and data, but such a system would have to allow for some safeguards against missuse to be widely adoptable. (Which is an interresting off-topic question - would it be possible to create a system that is private, but also has the possibility for trusted authorities to freeze accounts and force transactions?) And the more that I think about it, the more I'm certain that I'd rather have a centralized system where you can punish criminals and scammers, than a system where lives of people are regularly ruined by someone stealing all of their savings unpunished. But it is a thin line - I only say that because I live in a country that is all-right and I can trust my government - for now. But I definitely agree that such a private unmoderated option should exist - but can't be considered for widespread use, which I've heard some people say that "crypto will replace cash in a few years". And this is why it never will, IMO. But this discussion shouldn't be about whether this is a good opinion or not - but more about "what blockchain is a good tool for".
Next one are NFTs. I will just quickly gloss over them, because they are even bigger scam than crypto is. Ever heard someone say "Someone has copied and minted my NFT?". Well, it's a shame that there isn't some kind of centralized authority that could, you know, not allow them to do that.
Another use I've heard someone praise as "the future" was lending money. I'm not sure what were they talking about, but the whole point was that you can... Escrow an amount you are borrowing, and then borrow the same amount? It didn't make any sense, so I guess I'm missing something, but then again - we have the same issues as above, while also it being just a bizare idea - why simply not use the amount you already have? The person tried to explain it to me, but it just feels gimmicky. And if you escrow a lesser amount, you then have the same problem with moderation as above - nothing can force you to return the money (unless it is already escrowed, but then, why??)
So far, every use of blockchain I have heard about would be better done in a centralized fashion, especially as far as longevity is concerned. The growing ledger size and increasing gas cost, along with the 50% problem simply makes most of these kind of uses too impractical to work on a larger scale.
But I really like the concept and idea of smart contracts, and I'm sure there has to be some kind of use that is not as "revolutionary" or large scale. I'm just having hard time coming up with any.
I have only one - voting, and maybe transparent randomization (i.e lottery). Smart contracts are an amazing way to collect votes transparently but privately, since you can be sure that no-one can cheat, if you set it up properly. It's also something that doesn't suffer from the longevity problem, because it's more of a one-shot use of blockchain, rather than something ongoing - which also justifies the price.
(tl;dr feel free to start here:) Which is what I'm interested in - does any of you have similar ideas for use of smart contracts and blockchain, that would be practical in a daily live? Be it one-shot smart contracts for a small task, such as voting or random winner selection, maybe some kind of escrow. It doesn't have to be a "society changing system", or something revolutionary. A common small code snippets or apps that would solve the trust issue inherent to a centralized task is what I'm after - but have hard time coming up with.
And just a disclaimer - I don't plan on building anything and am not fishing for the next blockchain thing, I barely even understand it. I would just like to incorporate blockchain into my programming repertoire as a tool, because the concept feels so clever, but is also misused or misunderstood due to hype, but it has to have it's uses that are overshadowed by people jumping on the blockchain bandwagon without considering whether it's really the best tool for the job.
But is has to be a good tool for some kind of problems, right? And I would like to start a discussion about what would that be, without it being affected by the hype and reputation surrounding blockchain. I feel like that would be an interesting though exercise, and I'm sure we can come up with some interesting little uses here and there, without it being gimmicky but actually the best tool for the job.
Thank you!
EDIT: And I'd like to add that I never got into the blockchain hype, and my opinion on how it's used so far is mostly negative. If a product mentions blockchain, I usually just avoid it as a gimmick. But that's why I'm genuinely interested in this discussion - I don't judge a tool about how people misuse it.
I'm looking for games with unique or experimental game design
Hello!
One of the things I really enjoy is unique, interesting or out-of-the box game design. It doesn't have to be AAA game, it doesn't have to be a perfect game, it can be pretty rough - but if it has a mechanic or design element that is somehow unique or original, I'm instantly in love with the game.
The problem is that such games do not usually get a lot of exposure, since it is after all a niche. And that is really a shame - in the past few years the most fun had with video-games was playing such smaller and shorter indie games with something unique or pretty clever, where I can obsess over the design and more importantly - get inspired. That leads me to my question - are there any communites or blogs or content curators that are about this kind of smaller, maybe unpolished, but original games? Or what games would you recommend that would fit into this description? I don't mind if it's a 5 minute experience. It's ok if it's more interactive art than a game.
To better illustrate what I'm looking for, I'd compare it to modern art - the kind where you get a single colored square on a canvas. I never got it, and it always felt just weird - until I had to start doing flyer design and started researching and reading about composition, space and all that stuff. And now I see there's so much going on even on a picture with a single line, that it's really interesting to think about why the square is where it is, and what kind of composition rules was he working with.
And I think it's the same for game design - sometimes you see a clever mechanic or design on otherwise really ugly and unpolished game, and it still gets you inspired and thinking.
I understand that my question is a little bit vague, so I'll give you a list of some games I consider unique, some of them are well known, some of them not-so-much:
- Immortality \- you probably know about this one, but a game where the plot twist is discovering a hidden game mechanic, you could've done all the time? And the fact that you watch three movies at once in random scene order is also a really good experience.
- Against the Storm \- I really like how they solved the issue with management sims - that they tend to get boring once you set everything up, by making it a roguelike.
- Different Strokes \- an online persistent collaborative museum of art, where you can either leave a new painting, or edit someone's else. Each painting can be edited only once, so there are always two authors of a single piece.
- Sayonara Wild Hearts \- I really like the idea of making what's basically an interactive music album. While the game design isn't anyting that interresting, the focus on music is cool - there should be more music albums with video-games instead of video-clips.
- Project Forlorn \- Again, not really a game - this time I think there's no actuall gameplay, but it's the best interactive music album presentation I've ever seen. And again - I like the idea of exploring music and games together.
- Playdate \- Not exactly a single game, but rather a console - but the idea behind giving you a game per day (which is I think how it started, they may all be available now looking at it) sounds amazing - which I'd also consider a game design (or rather, experience design?).
- Baba is You - Another probably well known game, but the puzzle mechanic is just mindblowing.
- Before Your eyes - In this game, the main mechanic is that you go through the memories of someone who has just passed away, but the time advances every time you blink - physically blink, because the game can use your camera. That is such a clever idea, that it definitely fits onto this list.
- Nerve Damage - This is my favourite recent discovery. The game is trying so hard to be uncomfortable to play, with it's main design build around just being unplayable. But it somehow works and once you get into the flow, it's such an unique experience.
So, does anyone has some recommendations about where to look for more experimental games? A curated list, blog would be awesome - since clicking through pages of games on itch.io is pretty hit and miss. Also, feel free to share some of your favourite unique design or experimental experiences and games!
Would a single-user self-hosted frontend for interacting with Fediverse apps be feasible?
Hello!
While discussing about privacy on Lemmy and in the Fediverse, I've stumbled upon an idea that would solve some of the issues inherent to the fact that you need to have a home instance, that is under control of someone you have to trust. But my knowledge about ActivityPub is lacking, and I'm not sure if something like this would be possible or not. Also - it possible that something like that already exists, but I didn't manage to find anything.
So, would it be possible to create a Fediverse/ActivityPub app that is just a self-hosted frontend for interacting with other apps, such as Lemmy or Mastodon, that only hosts your own personal data related to your account, but not the content you post to other instances?
The main thing I'm unsure with is how Fediverse works in this regard - who hosts the content. If my home instance is programming.dev, and I create a Post or a Comment on lemmy.ml, who is the source of truth for that post? Does the content get saved on my home instance, and Lemmy.ml only gets an ID that it queries if an user requests it, or do I send the content to Lemmy.ml to live on their server?
Depending on this, it would make such a self-hosted app easier or harder. If the content lives on the instance I post it to, it would mean that you can create a fediverse app that only stores your personal user information and DMs, and you don't have to deal with serving your posts to others - because they live on the other instance you posted it to. Then all that would be left is to create an UI for displaying and querying content from other instances, and you have a way how to interact with the Fediverse without risking any of your personal private data.
On the other hand, if the content would have to live on my instance, I would have to deal with serving it to whoever requests it, which would make it a lot harder to self-host.
I kind of hope it's the first option, because then it would allow for public communities of content-only servers while also letting users have their own personal-data only instances that allows them to interact with the rest. And I really like that idea, because it would allow you to for example have reliable E2E for messages, since you have the code that generates and stores the private certificate under absolute control, and only need to share your private key with others.
In general, it seems like a great solution to many privacy problems on the Fediverse, and if something like that would be possible (without having to serve the content, because then it may get too resource-intensive for a regular user), I would definitely try to come up with such a solution.
And now that I think about it - if you actually have to host the content, then it maybe be possible to create a combination of user-data / content servers, where you select a public community run content server to host your data, and have the personal user-data server self-hosted. And if a request comes to your user-data server for content, you just redirect it to the community-ran server. But that's just brainstorming.
Apps/Extensions that feed random fingerprinting data? Something I'd call "offensive privacy tools".
Hello!
Ever since I've seen the screenshot of permissions that the Threads app requires, I've been thinking that it would be a great idea if you could have an app that would give them the permission, but kept feeding it random and bullshit data.
This could extend to other fingerprinting tools on the web - I can make my browser have limited fingerprinting, but as far as I know, it's usually static. Using letterboxing will set your pixel size to a common value, and privacy focused browsers are using constant User Agent that includes everything.
But that's not going to help too much - I want my fingerprint to be random, and totally wrong. Feed them unusable data, something that not only isn't useful for them - but also actively sabotages their analytics. Pair that with a VPN, and now they have no way how to track you across sites, and also get a lot of bullshit data.
Another great thing would be an Adblock extension that not only hides every ad, but also click on it. Multiple times. Sure, it would be giving money to the websites you visit (which may be good), but it will also cost advertisers who pay for clicks (and will probably get you banned anyway).
I'm assuming that nothing like that exists, but I suppose that forking UBlock or forking LibreWolf could work, and just adding a Random here and there into their anti-fingerprinting code could maybe not be so hard.
In my understanding of the main principles of the Fediverse, federating with any large corp should never even be considered. Is my understanding wrong? What is the "idea of the fediverse" to you?
There is one argument I've seen missing in most of the de/federation discussions, that I think should be mentioned, and warrants it's own discussion.
I've seen a lot of people mentioning that defederating with Meta means we have broken the promise of Fediverse, that you can use one account to interact with whatever service you choose, and that it should be inclusive.
But I don't agree that's the main idea. There is something that's more important, and to make sure I'm not misinterpreting it, I'll just directly quote various websites about the Fediverse I've found (I was just taking top results for Fediverse on DuckDuckGo, but I did select only the parts that are the most important point for me personally). But I do concur, I was not able to find a single source of truth, and I'm not really sure how credible the resources are, so please disagree with me if it's wrong or I've chosen some no-name site that just matched my rethorics.
https://www.fediverse.to/ has the following sentence as the main hero header: > The fediverse is a collection of community-owned, ad-free, decentralised, and privacy-centric social networks. > > Each fediverse instance is managed by a human admin. You can find fediverse instances dedicated to art, music, technology, culture, or politics. > > Join the growing community and experience the web as it was meant to be.
Another search result is for fediverse.party, which has the following quite in https://fediverse.party/en/fediverse/ : > Fediverse (also called Fedi) has no built-in advertisements, no tricky algorithms, no one big corporation dictating the rules. Instead we have small cozy communities of like-minded people.
The page also mentions some link for knowledge about the fediverse. Some of them are only tutorials about how to join, but there's also https://joinfediverse.wiki/What_is_the_Fediverse%3F , with the following part: > How does it compare to traditional social media? > >... > > Morals > > * Traditional social media is neither social nor media. It is not made for you, it is made to exploit you and it is full of misleading ads and fake news. > * This is because the aim of traditional social media is to make a whole lot of money. > * The aim of the Fediverse is to benefit the people. > * The aim of traditional social media is to control and steer the users. > * The aim of the Fediverse is to empower the users to control the Fediverse.
I wasn't able to find more websites directly about the fediverse, and I did not want to quote random articles. But for completion sake, here is a list of FAQ/About sections of websites that are about the Fediverse, but don't directly support or imply the point of view I was trying to make (one that can be best summarized by the Morals in the last quite):
- https://fediverse.info/frequently-asked-questions
- https://fedi.tips/what-is-mastodon-what-is-the-fediverse/
- https://framatube.org/w/9dRFC6Ya11NCVeYKn8ZhiD
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fediverse
- https://the-federation.info/
The split seems to be 50:50, but at least for my DuckDuckGo search results, the https://www.fediverse.to/ is the first result you find, and that one is pretty clear about what Fediverse should be. I wanted to start a discussion about what do the users here see as a main selling point of the fediverse, and whether morals and non-profit nature of the instances is important to most of the users as it is to me, or whether you'd rather have interconnectness and inclusivness.
ELI5 - What is the difference between headphones, earphones and IEMs?
Hello! I was looking through the sidebar's list of recommended earphones, and after clicking through some of them, I've realized that I actually don't know if that's a list for me, a consumer looking for something to jack into my phone.
I've tried quickly looking for differences between IEMs and headphones, but didn't managed to reach a conclusion. I've vaguely familiar with the term "monitors", since I do help out from time with band shows, but I never actually dealt with audio equipment or audio setup (aside from carrying it to the stage). From what I assume based on what I've seen, monitors are the the speakers that play on stage, so the band can hear what they play. And IEMs are earbud versions of monitors that the band uses instead.
I've always assumed that they are basically headphones/earphones, just connected to some kind of transmitter, and calling them IEMs just makes it easier to find earbuds focused on audio quality, because the term is not as mass-marketed as earbuds are. But judging by the cable connector I've seen on some of the IEMs I've looked at, it's probably not a jack.
So, what are the differences? Is it a different tech all-together, or are they really just a higher quality earphones with better connector? Would looking for IEMs instead of earbuds make it easier to find better earbuds for regular use, or are they meant only for studios and I'll have a hard time even connecting them without aditionall equipment?
Thank you for any reply or explanation. I realize this question may seem pretty basic, and I hope it's not too out of place - I have almost zero experience with audio, but I did start recently DJing (where all I needed so far was to be able to connect RCA into a mixer) and helping out with setting up band shows, so I'm asking this question not because I'm shopping for earbuds, but because I'm honestly interested in learning something new about how different tech around music work and what's the common language around it.