deleted by creator

Obligatory; It’s called linux

Back in the day I used Nagios to get an overview of large systems, and it made it very obvious if something wasn’t working and where. But that was 20 years ago, I’m sure there are more modern approaches.

Come to think of it, at work we have grafana running, but I’m not sure exactly what scope it’s operating under.

Not that strange. Different users may belong to different groups which may have different authentication backends. The associated authentication method is brought up once a username has been provided.

Barring any hardware issues or external factors, will it run for 10000 years? Any logs not properly rotated? And other outputs accumulating and eventually filling up a filesystem?

Because despite what they believe, they aren’t challenging my world view. They’re peddling conspiracy theories and setting Olympic records in mental gymnastics to ignore mountains of evidence, all in an effort to present “proof” that has been refuted over and over again. It’s a position that is absolutely laughable and any flat earther who considers themselves rational have already presented enough anecdotal evidence that a debate on the subject will be as stupid as the belief itself.

The surrender wasn’t unconditional. Germany accepted a surrender which did not include Zeeland in the armstice. This also meant any maritime and air assets in the region.

Also, Netherlands had an offramp by surrendering. See my comment about being on death ground above.

Sounds more like what you need is a combination of a VPN and RDP. Have your machines connect to somewhere via whichever VPN protocol you prefer, and then you can access them via whichever protocol you prefer.

I’m old and crusty, so I mostly use openvpn, but wireguard will probably do as well.

Ben, is that you?

EDIT: Nope, you said “accidentally”

There have been some, but I’m not sure to which extent.

That’s why I said “conventional”, which nukes aren’t

Time will show. There are some shitheads, such as Nick Fuentes, who have publicly disavowed Trump, and even Alex Jones is having a hard time defending Trump these days. Defection are happening, but any long term effect will probably be seen via a slow trickle and not a sudden drop in approval rating.

The truth is, most people don’t stay up to date on the news, so while the base probably won’t notice that the current Trump talking points are inconsistent at best, come a year or two and they will probably notice that they are objectively worse off after Trump decided to spend billions on a war with Iran for dubious benefits. We will never see a point of “That’s it, fuck you!” on xitter. Suddenly the support will lose critical mass and fade into the background just like the teaparty did.

I’m cautiously optimistic stemming from the fact that ideologies based on hate never succeed in the long run. They either fizzle out, eat themselves, or on rare occasions implode spectacularly.

Trump has also surrounded himself with yes-men, just like this Austrian corporal once did. While Hitler certainly had a loyal staff, they were far from competent; Göhring thought he could bomb UK i to submission. And the rest of the staff were more focused on licking rectoplasm than facing reality.

And even if Iran changed their minds, it’s not like the mines will just disappear

Why: I think it’s mostly a matter of trump wanting to make a name for himself outside of his maga cult. Neocons never liked him, and he hopes this might change it. Plus, a dose of realpolitik in an effort to seem tough usually works.

When: It will have to end soon, otherwise he’ll be shitting in his base. However, while wanting to pull back he’ll realize he has two choices:

• Declare “victory” and leave the regime still in power, leaving people (his base included) asking what all these tax dollars were spent on
• Keep going, losing more and more support from his isolationist base and then some. Iran is, at present, the most unpopular war from a US polling perspective, so it is highly unlikely there will be a rally-around-the-flag effect for him. Even more unlikely the linger it goes on - a war doesn’t become more popular over time.

How: Airstrikes will continue until the paragraph above has been addressed. And since Trump never reads history, he’s probably way too optimistic, never realizing this simple fact: No country/regime has ever unconditionally surrendered because of conventional airstrikes and bombardment alone.

To quote Sarah Paine (renowned military scholar and historian), once you put your enemy on death ground, meaning they will have to fight on or (probably) die, they will not surrender. Trump never offered the Iran regime an offramp, and while it sucks to be in Iran right now, they have no incentive to surrender.

Only slightly

Never heard of him/her/them, so no.

So, youtube reaction face?

Silly question, but… what’s a pogface?

The humor here is lost on me

Looks like an URL matcher of some sorts, not limited to HTTP. Kudos for handling parentheses as valid URL characters.