This is a way better and simpler explanation of the general principle. Thanks

You can loosely think of hydraulics like pulleys, whatever ratio of input to output power you create is accompanied by a reduction in distance moved.

So a weight of 1kg on an area of 1sqm could balance a weight of 10kg on an area of 10sqm, but moving the 1kg would only generate 1m of travel for every 10m of movement applied.

If you try and displace 1sqm by 10m, you are displacing 10 cubic metres. If you use that displacement to move an area 10x the size, it need only move 1/10 of the distance i.e. 1 metre

You need to keep adding weight (force) to achieve the movement. The initial weight will only balance the system.

I assume that the comic is about breaking apart the mountain, you don’t have to move far at all to achieve destruction. You also need a watertight system.

Can we have Google Chrome?

No, we have Gogle Chome at home

I’ve been on Mint with Cinnamon for about 5 years across desktops, laptops, and home server

I had to update a machine with a version of Mint that was EoL this year, so I just upgraded through several major versions in a row with no issues

It was interesting seeing how much more polished each upgrade process was

I created a symlink to the directory the symlink is in. If I try and simply ‘delete’ the symlink in a file browser it tells me that gigs of data will be deleted

That beginners guide says to avoid creating circular symlinks. What if, entirely hypothetically, I already have a circular symlink?

I wasn’t thinking in detail, just addressing an assumption I think a lot of age verification discussions include, which is that the verifier would have to be trusted to maintain some sort of account for you, retaining your data etc.

I have no idea what the legislation says, but I’d be a happier privacy-conscious user if the verification platforms were independent (i.e. not in any other data business) and regulated, with a requirement they don’t retain my personal data at all (like the liquor store example)

So the verifier gathers data from you, matches it with a request from the platform, provides confirmation that some standard has been met, and deletes almost all personal information - I acknowledge that this may not rise to the double-blind standard of the original request

Edited to add:

• you don’t have to ‘buy’ a token, the platform needs to pay verifiers as a cost of business

• some other comments are asking how you prevent the verifier knowing the platform - to my mind you don’t, instead the verifier retains a request id record from the platform, but forgets entirely who you are

A joke answer, but with the kernel of truth - IRL age verification often requires a trusted verifier (working under threat of substantial penalty) but often doesn’t require that verifier to maintain any documentation on individual verification actions

https://chinwag.au/verification/

“Although FBI file reviews are standard for presidential cabinet candidates…”

I don’t disagree with you, but this is a non-story. The committee asks for and receives this information as a matter of course

Needs an extra panel for LMFAO where the last panel shows a slight exhalation through the nose

Relevant xkcd

Harris Wins Tasty Endorsement

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2023/05/critics-say-googles-new-zip-and-mov-domains-will-be-a-boon-to-scammers/

Thanks, I was more worried that there was something completely wrong security-wise with that approach!

Genuine question from someone with a single page static site - why is Cloudflare a useless suggestion?

1. On-prem
2. Self-hosting

And I’ll argue it’s on-prem even if you don’t have the physical server in your building

In an age of dissent, being able to identify masked protesters by the top of their head might be very useful

“Well, see you Monday!”

It tells you right there in the log: “DRDY”