#ot1-perplexing-regexing
1 messages · Page 347 of 1
i think you can launch in detached mode, but i don't remember how
ctrl+c doesn't stops it
It move it to the background
And then you can type fg to bring it back to the foreground
or i can just start program with nohup
You can
But depending on the program, making a service in a service manager might be a better choice
that's still per session
Closing a window/session will send a SIGHUP to the process, causing it to exit unless it has specific handling for that signal
This is what you want
If you want something to continue running when you close the window, then you have a few options
You use screen if you're working on something manually and want to come back to it later
If you're running a daemon (for example a server) then you probably want to use a systemd unit
Creating a unit isn’t that hard :D
If you just want to drop back to the terminal, then you can use CTRL+D - and use fg to get back to your app
Never use nohup if you can avoid it
It makes for extremely messy process management
CTRL+D? Isn’t it C? I have my anwser
Also, CTRL+C will send SIGINT (a keyboard interrupt) to the program, usually that's a closing operation but some apps don't use it for that
Most text editors will ignore it because a lot of people try to use it to copy text accidentally
But basically everything else will try to stop what it's doing and close
So there you go, @rough sapphire
Job control in a nutshell
Unlike what bisk will tell you, screen is NOT the lazy option
_Or you can open another SSH connection if you do use SSH, and leave it running in the background 😄 _
A systemd unit is by far the easiest and laziest way to get a server running
_Or you can open another SSH connection if you do use SSH, and leave it running in the background 😄 _
@solid pollen
that really annoys me
There are also apps like tmux (and its better cousin, wemux) that can multiplex one terminal
So you can split it into panes and run more than one thing
Tilix is a GUI app that does the same thing
Lame
[15:07] gdude: Unlike what bisk will tell you, screen is NOT the lazy option
that depends entirely what you use it for
ooohhh, you were shitting on systemd
that's fine
But he did say systemd is easy to use
It is really that easy?
A shame that you need a CTRL key
(yes I sometime don’t have a ctrl key)
weird thing to not have
Well I mean he leases it out part time
No CTRL key 😦
Hehe
@gentle moss screen is easy until you have more than one of them
I don't even install screen on my boxes anymore, it's so useless
named screens
This one's Terry, this one's Steven, this one's Bernard...
And you just remember all the names?
Perhaps you'd remember the name of your unit instead
screen --list
just sensibly name shit, duh
when i started working here everything was named super fucking dumb
servers like vulkan, starbug, starbuck(always confused with starbug), citadel, mars, blah, blah
worst
is anyone here proficient with java?
Students
yikes
He licks for eternity
@plucky ridge well like im new to java so its nothing extreme. I use netbeans however if that effecsts anything
Shouldn't, Java code written in one editor is as good as written in any other
tag your #body horror
Seen worse
Yesterday I watched an hour of people getting stabbed to teach us not to stab or something
Thank you school
it goes in so smoooooooth
Uhh
I saw someone with their hand cut off hanging from a thread and someone ripped apart from infection after stabbing themselves?
Woah wait why is this being discussed?
school work
Uh... huh
If someone is a type of person to be going around stabbing it's not going to stop them
it might even make them want to stab people more
:OOOO
it's like when they used to show us videos in year 6 of kids climbing pylons
or going into substations
and shit like that
except stabbing
Most are just in a gang rather than murderers though
Oh yeah
We had that one
I think I saw the aftermath of a bus accident
I'm pretty sure those kinds of awareness videos have either 0 or negative effect, and always have. But schools continue to run them to make it feel like they're doing something goos good
And I have seen 2 hours worth of people being either struck by lightning (to teach us something?) and the other hour was about the 3rd rail
Yeah
Noted, thanks for the tip :)
The only one of those I remember is a speedaware course with quite possibly the most poorly acted tragedy
It was a bit excessive to show 11-12 year olds
oh that accident where the girl gets smashed up
Actually no, 10-11
and rebuilds herself
If you like those sorts of videos..
and I have no idea why they did a speed awareness course with 16 yos
i mean it goes in reverse
These are a bit more fun
to stop you speeding when you get your license at 17
I mean at least it builds up gore tolerances?
DUH
That's the only good impact it could possibly have
tbh steak and cheese dot com did that for me ages before school even touched on it
rofl
The only thing that will stop some people speeding is a lamp post
they wont actually stop you
Or a brick thrown from a bridge
and showing a video you just meme on isn't even gonna discourage you
because they're designed to collapse now
As we where taught in a quite grusome manner
I think I have seen some marginally worse things than what school has shown on my time on the internet
11foot8 is great
Every time they put up another flashing sign but yet there are still crashes :)
The bridge has gone now
so if you were a city planner, how would you solve the 11foot8 problem. people will still hit it despite huge flashing signs
do what they did and raise the bridge?
^
it's 8 inches higher than it was
costly solution
which might not be much, but its still not near as iconic
the other option is to put in an height detection system that issues fines
people hate fines
so along with a fucked up truck
you get a $10k fine
Oh yeah
Documentation of how the 11foot8 canopener bridge in Durham, North Carolina was raised by 8 inches to improve safety for tall vehicles on Gregson Street.
bridge has 3 paths to it, but most trucks come from the road straight-on. so 300ft before the bridge have a camera detect the height of a vehicle and have a rubber damper drop down overhead to 'bump' their truck @ 11ft 8" to catch their attention. non damaging.
hah
just a tap, with a big sign that says "this rubber damper is 11 foot 8 off the ground, you will hit the bridge ahjead"
cheap + easy solution
HGV drivers should know the height of their vehicle
Thats not gonna fix the problem
if you started fining companies and revoking licenses
why piers
thats very ignorable
you'd probably see a change
the rubber damper hitting your truck??
you couldnt NOT notice it
a distinct "thump"
yeah
noticing doesn't matter
then you wouldn't give a fuck about it
if they don't know the height of their truck
and you'd drive into a bridge
hmmm
well how else could you alert the drivers with big trucks heading toward the bridge, BEFORE they hit it???
signs
First solution to a problem should be remove the problem, second solution should be remove the people
so yeah, fining them is fine
massive fines
I wonder if many people got fired for hitting it
i don't drive through a give way junction because i "didn't see a sign"
fines wont work. people still speed
people don't speed around cameras
very different
if you'll ignore signs, you'll ignore fines
hahaha
no you won't
I can' see why you think people would listen to a bump, but not a 50k$ fine
fines are cumbersome because you'll have trucks coming in from hundreds of miles away. how will you make the drivers aware of the new laws?
with a fucking sign
nobody will pay a 50k fine, the insurance will
my solution:
- large fines for vehicles which hit the bridge. you need to recover costs of damages and scare the companies.
- revoke the licenses of the drivers
that's not
how
they already dont read signs
if I get a speeding ticket
I don't ring up the insurance company
hmmm
you revoke licenses and fine companies who hired them
or, generally, owner of the truck
so a sign before the bridge that says if you hit this, 50k fine + license suspended for X days
you don't even need to put the fine
if people can't read basic road signs
they shouldn't be on the fucking road
My guess is for such a non standard fine, you'd need to warn people about it
well then, don't treat it as a fine
How much money must these bridges have costed in damage
make it a civil damages case
how are they going to argue "he didn't know how big his truck was"
or "he didn't see the sign"
when both should be things a responsible driver should know
@vestal briar only repainting and inspection costs I imagine
make it civil damages and you can recoup your lawyer costs from them as well
you shouldn't make exceptions for people who are shit at their job
That was 1968
The guy with his hands on his hips. "Whelp, I'm fired."
Looks like they have been shit at their jobs for a while now
Imagine this bridge being a legend of truck drivers before 11foot8 started
folklore almost
Yeah
yeah, I'm pretty sure at no point in life/your-career are you not regularly encountering people who are shit at their job and just generally thick
so you'd expect that from truckers as well
"The bridge is so tiny not even a car can fit through" then everyone jumps
Wonder what the worst crash has been
a lot of the trucks that crash are Penske. Maybe Penske should tell people before renting the truck about this bridge...
Probably the local company
the person doing the rental stuff isn't gonna be driving it
They fire their employees too often for it to become a warning inside the job
i thought these people rented the trucks like u-hauls to do personal moves?
Oh is it rental?
idk isn't that what penske does
It all looks like HGVs
or maybe commercial fleet leasing...
those aren't rentals
what would they be for?
The 11 best crashes at the 11Foot8 bridge in Durham, NC, recorded by Jürgen Henn (c)
FAQ
What is the location of the 11foot8 bridge?
201 Gregson St in Durham, NC (intersection with Peabody St)
Why is the bridge so low?
This train trestle is about 100 years old. At the time...
can opener @ 42s
the United States is fucking arse backwards on their driving laws
watching the same on my big TV
:D
if you did that shit in the UK
you'd have your license for that type of vehicle revoked
you'd have to pay a big ass fucking fine
and maybe civil damages
if it was a professional driver rather than an individual
the company might face action
minimum
wreckless endangerment
are those trucks written off, or would that be repaired?
written off i'd say
Isn't that for potential loss of life?
yeah, and there is
box repair = $$$$ or $$, $$$
Nah, I don't know if they would be written off. I'm pretty sure the actual trailers aren't that expensive
it's just riveted metal right
Top of the box won't kill anyone and bridge is designed to withstand it
and if you get rear ended when you suddenly stopped?
the bridge doesnt get damaged i think, the bar in front of the bridge is mounted to the ground actually
so all the trucks hit the bar, not the bridge
WHICH HAD TO BE ADDED
That what if could be applied to any car accident in a populated area then?
FROM PEOPLE DAMAGING THE BRIDGE
lol
yeah but it's not an accident is it though.
doesnt get damaged *anymore
Nobody is hitting it on purpose
you never know
if a car accident was caused by someone driving like a fucking idiot
and in this context
driving like a fucking idiot is not knowing the height of your truck
or ignoring signs
you're a hazard and a potential risk to life
wreckless endangerment could fit
i mean we're talking about America here though
you can speed and only have to pay fines
you might never lose your license for it
points system for lyfe boys
Is hitting a mcdonals drive "thru" roof reckless endangerment?
it's not a big deal imo. the 11foot8 guy on his site says most people miss it. 2010-19 there's about 1 truck hitting it a month. so im guessing 99.8% of trucks heed the warnings
it's a big enough deal people should lose their license
imo
:P
at least to drive that class of vehicle
I get that truckers probably aren't ever gonna pay that much attention if sat on interstates for hundreds of miles. But if you're driving through a built up area
how many trucks pass by that daily. say 50. monthly thats 1500 monthly. so 1 truck a month is 0.067% of trucks hitting it a month
you need to know whats going on
^
but they're hitting a stationary object
i say do nothing because it's a non-problem
which is worse
IN TRAFFIC
nobody gets injured right
If you're the local town
you don't want to close the road once a month
because of morons
shit, what if one person dies?
the only people who pay for this are 1) the bridge owner's insurance, 2) the trucking company's insurance 3) the customer's of the trucking company's insurance
nobody else is hurt by a few idiots crashing into a bridge
No one is insuring this fucking bridge
^
Losing license and job with some fine is probably the normal way
isnt it a train company that owns the bridge? it's insured
the insurance company probably made them put up that giant fucking guillotine
Do you know how insurance works?
Hm
if one person dies, raise bridge 8" + introduce fine over $1,000 for each truck that hits it
@undone berry elaborate?
Why didn't they highten the bridge before
that's
why wait
fucking nothing
The bridge was rebuilt after the 60s but it was still low
why on earth would an insurer insure something they know is going to be hit once a month
do you really want truck drivers out there who don't pay attention to signs?
if im a taxpayer im not voting for someone who wants to pay $$$,$$$ to raise a bridge at my expense
then you're a moron
Are you talking to @quasi estuary (bisk)
@undone berry i guarantee that bridge is insured under the owner of the bridge. it's a part of an active railroad
there's literally a railway bridge where this sort of thing has happend like 4 times
Plan: Raise the bridge, then fine people as though the bridge was lower
and they raised the bridge
After 90 years
or just, you know
Here it is in the 30's
actually have a license system and punish people for their actions
But eh
drivers should lose licenses and pay fines
@undone berry i dont like the whatism of that solution but i cant explain what precisely i think is wrong with it
That's just a vehicle decapitator to get them punished on purpose
it doesn't even matter if anyone dies
people hitting the bridge
people will get hurt, people could die
is a consequence of that
this is clearly a fucking public nuisance
Wouldn't that then be the goverment breaking more laws
By purposefully not raising the bridge, hence making that potential loss of life in the first place
what, the government not raising the bridge so idiots can drive under it?
Even if the truck drivers are morons
you are responsible for your actions as a driver
how much do we estimate raising it 8" actually cost?
why should the taxpayer bear that burden?
why does that matter?
because didnt the g't raise the bridge?
and if we were experts
we wouldn't be experts in that specific bridge
and all of those factors determine factors of 10 or more
Even if the drivers are morons
fine drivers / companies heavily for that act (or take them to court over it) and then revoke the drivers license
Goverment should not purposefully make a decapitator
because clearly they're not fit to be driving that vehicle
im saying it's not the taxpayers burden to solve this problem. the stakeholders who stand to lose $$$ should have found a solution. my question is why havent they. they = railroad company, truck companies
that's like me saying
"oh this S-bend is so tight, stupid government"
because i crashed and have now died
the stakeholders don't give a toss
this impacts the public
the stakeholders can just put a fucking pole down and ignore the problem
how much effort is it to clean up afterwards?
that seems like a police incident
road is closed
Goverment wouldn't put spike stips on no-parking zones
people have to detour
if im running a trucking company like Penske and 1 truck crashes every 2 months for 10 years, that might have a material impact on my bottom line via insurance rates, claims, lost revenue, etc
That would just be a death waiting to happen
i dont know how big Penske is
Same as this bridge I guess
problem is Owez, the UK is semi-rational when it comes to road safety
and you've grown up here
the US is fucking insane
for what bisk
driving.
what specifically is thou'st beef
Yeah
cananda is
US are more "leniant" but that just seems overly-stupid
you have to be CONVICTED to get points
in the UK they're automatic on an offence
and you can appeal
Engineers designing it also contributed I guess unless they unsucsessfully pushed at raising
Ok - ungoodnight, this is a different conversation. The US road layouts are even insane. People are too stupid to know how roundabouts work, so you just have deathtrap massive intersections
hm wait. maybe it's not a big deal. if you crash in the USA with no point system, your insurance rates go up...
no roundabouts was a TERRIBLE decision btw
well how should it work?
You can also just not claim on the insurance
Hm I have an idea
"you crashed, maybe you shouldn't drive"
Make people pay for getting basic healthcare!
i dont think thats fair
what?!
Insurance rates don't go up if you don't claim
you don't think someone who clearly can't drive
shouldn't have their license revoked?
so if they're rich they can just pay the insurance difference?
ok bisk say I misjudge an icy intersection and I get in a fender bender. my insurance rates go up because I'll make an insurance claim to fix my bumper. does that mean i shouldnt drive?
Sounds like bail for licenses
yes. That is the exact scenario bisk posed
that's competely different. that's not total negligence
he is saying every accident should result in a total ban
if you trip and headbut your car
no more driving
i'm talking about wilful negligence
bisk your solution is optimal but you'd never be able to draw a clear line between when you should NEVER be able to drive again. what is that line, for every circumstance?
I'd say case-by-case basis
look at UK driving law, it's pretty fucking robust on this
If the box truck is on a car license and the company did not give proper introduction if it's a rental
ok so in the UK how does it work?
wilful disregard for law or negligence will net you a ban
Yeah, the UK doesn't do many permabans. But gives out 1/1.5/2 year bans quite regularly
DEPENDING on severity of problems
so what's running a red light in the UK?
sometimes 3 -6 year bans
that's 3 points
you get 12 points on a license
unless you slammed into someone
My dad got one of them because of a broken sensor
then it might be higher
Bugger to appeal apparently
most things are three points, using the phone is 6.
I think seatbelt is a caution then 3-6 on 2nd offence
driving a truck you should know the height of into a fucking bridge?
that's a HGV license revoked
the point system is just a mickey mouse way of explaining it though. like if points = consequences (fines, driving restrictions, court), the US has all those right?
so whats the diff?
You can rent a box truck here without a hgv license if we're talking about uk now
you don't get banned for speeding too often
if at all
you don't get banned for using the phone too often
in fact, thats not even illegal over there
a CONGRESSMAN has had 13 speeding offences
wait you can get BANNED from driving in the uk for driving while using a phone?!
I think
insanity
insanity? Its worse than speeding
can you have your phone mounted to your dash?
yes.
yes
I'd hope so
Yes but you can't use it
Police are pretty reasonable about it as well
i've been in the US
although they can be bastards if they choose
and i've seen them drive
If it's no-hands its fine
they're fucking mental
Hands free systems are fine, yep
Like a glorified satnav
(Even though driving whilst using hands free has been shown to be just as bad as holding it to your ear)
Really?
Yeah - it makes sense too if you think about it
You have 2 hands on the wheel and have full vision
2 hands on the wheel doesn't make that much difference
the real problem here isn't; driving laws, it's insurance laws. if you are in an accident with someone without insurance, everyone loses.
no
the key issue is being distracted and not giving the road full attentnio
It's still a distraction but it's not a visual or physical distraction
If it's hands free it's the same as just talking with passengers?
this is not an insurance problem
Why do you fetishise insurance companies?
you can't solve everything with friggin money
if you think changing driving laws in the USA will change driving behavior, i disagree.
why does the USA assume things that work across the entire world won't work in the US
Why do you fetishise the word "fetishise" :p
no, it works because the culture there is ingrained
that's why they can't have their guns restricted too.
look what that fucking does
american exceptionalism
But my freedom!11!
🇺🇸
Gun control? Won't work here
Universal healthcare? Won't work here
Driving laws? Won't work here
2A baby
Very nice unicode consortium
i agree though stiffer penalties benefit everyone
Free education? Won't work here
probably because they're too fucking thick
e.g. distracted driving ticket is like $400-500 in canada
Logical unit system? Won't work here
(I know but don't tell them that)
what do you propose for gun control solutions in the USA ?
is that $500 and points?
oh shut the fuck up
Also please no duplicate metric vs imperial convosations <3
like you do it 4 more times and you get banned?
the same gun control that works world over
We have them like weekly now
uhhhhhhhhhhh
do you abolish 2A?
Background checks and limitations on what can be bought by whom
i can't be bothered to get into this but fundamentally the 2A was redefined by a supreme court case in the early 00's
which completely changed the definition of it
oh really
and that most countries in the world don't have like 2 fucking shootings a day
yes. it did.
i'll fucking go find it
brb.
Hm
that's not sarcasm i didnt know that tbh
Why aren't air rifles more popular for protection
because they're shit for protection
District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), is a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms, unconnected with service in a militia, for traditionally lawful purpose...
this changed the definition from "well regulated militia" to individual rights
Are guns are usually a deterrent rarther than to shoot someone dead in the US
and after that ruling personal ownership of guns (and along with it violence etc) rose massively
i have had this conversation far too many times with yanks
Given that the police regularly shoot innocent people because they might have a gun
I'd say they're the opposite of a deterrent
the fact they might be present costs lives
at this point i feel like a broken record
Yeah
plus i've got a massive meatball sub on the way
But if someone buys a gun
bbl.
Not much of a deterrent is it
oh - pretty sure the motivation is to shoot
Locked in a safe
like, waving it at someone isn't gonna do much
If someone sees a gun in the window, it'll be a little bit of a deterrent surely
still cooking
gdude is correct.
firearms need to be stored properly in a gunsafe
legal requirement
Do you mean like a gun sticker , or do you mean, an actual physical gun in the window?
Let's just say they had a real one out illigally
then they're irresponsible gun owners and shouldn't own a gun
Yup
Resting on a cupboard near an open blind
Easy report
yeah, this is a pretty dumb scenario
This is america we are talking about
If I can see the gun then I'll just report it
yeah, and that's the problem
I realise that
they think they're special because of a few lines of text that have been reinterpreted to mean WE GODDA HAV RRR GUNS ITS URRR RIGHT U NO
Really he just wanted everyone to have some bear arms
ONLY FIN CAN STUP A BAD GUY WITH A GUUUUN IS A GUD GUY WIT A GUUUN
fucking seen to many dead kids to bother with those arguments
Sounds like a nice law unless you loophole
It means you can Home Alone it
As in, if they die you're culpable, or is it only if you set out to kill them?
Haha
Booby traps?
Just make them fall into a pit and have them struggle out for a day
You also have to be able to prove that they shouldn't have been there and there was no way they'd have thought they should be
unlawful imprisonment probably owez
Yeah you can't do that
Basically the idea is that you can fight them off of your property
What if you don't activly keep them there
in 2017 the USA had 40k gun deaths, 24k of those were suicides so that's 16k non-suicide gun deaths. people get so aggressive about this topic because they think it's so preventable, but more deaths happen because of even MORE EASILY preventable things
Just on legal grounds as there was a hole there and you where away whilst they where in it
(You being actually unaware they where there)
Not that many things lead to children being mass murdered
250,000 people per year in the USA die from preventable medical errors
70,000 from drug overdoses
Children being mass murdered is a lot more egregious than preventable heart disease
Medical errors?
yup, i'm out this convo.
They happen anywhere
peace. o/
Medical errors are gonna happen
But we already knew the US doesn't know what healthcare is
For any problem which globally there is a clear solution for, you're dumb for not taking that solution
what's the clear solution???
oh shut the fuck up
Communal health care
Buy back the guns like the other countries have
Like we see in basically every developed nation
yeah thats one way. AUS
The UK and AUS did it
STOP SELLING SEMI-AUTOMATIC .223 RIFLES WITH 30 ROUND MAGAZINES IN THEM TO PEOPLE WHO CAN GET A DRIVING LICENSE
Banning handguns is a start
STEP 1
can't even DRINK but you can buy a fucking death machine
my meatball sub isn't quite done
:(
so many obvious limitations that aren't in place
When did UK enforce guns again?
90s
literally one school shooting happened with a handgun in the UK and we fucking banned them
Huh
1996/7
I thought it was 50s or 60s
no, that's for rifles / semi-automatic large capacity weapons
Pretty sure even back then we had much stronger limits
and automatic weapons
Ah
something the US still doesn't do
here's my solution for the USA:
- medical background checks integrating medical records across all states
- require all firearms trigger locked and ammo stored separately
- any negligent behavior results in a 5-year ban
What was allowed pre-1996
I go back to what I said before
just a thought
shut the fuck up
australia didnt have 2A though
does the 2A give the right to a semi-automatic large calibre rifle that can hold 30 - 50 rounds?
no.
- limit clip sizes
Oh now I know who you're quoting
- get rid of all open-carry laws
Haha
gdude i found it through a wiki link on gunplolicy.org
my sub is done now.
Some day the argument will die down to "but we need to keep people employed!1!11!!!"
Yeah
that simple.
@sand goblet wait i wasnt off. about 40k gun deaths, 24k suicides, so 16k willful
as though the law doesn't deal with millions of edge cases in other areas
What's the uk vs us violent deaths per 100k?
Well, last year's stats aren't out yet
(E.g. weapons)
The suicide numbers have been steadily rising though
@sand goblet my #'s were 2017 but yeah
I mean I didn't say it was inaccurate
biggest mistake the USA did was that 2000s court case bisk linked
Useful to get the full picture
all firearms NEED to be locked.
- you can only have a firearm with you if you're going either to or from a range or designated safe shooting area
Contrary to popular belief you can get guns here in Ireland, for huntin' or shootin' varmints
We have almost no gun crime though
You only see them in rural areas really
Does UK have to have a reason for air rifles and the sorts?
i bet ireland laws are similar to canada
In the UK shotguns aren't too difficult to get, but rifles are very hard to get licensed for
I know we don't for smaller powered things like airsoft
And I've never actually seen one in person
you can own them at gun ranges I think, but not actually take them away
We don't really have gun ranges
You can just buy air rifles
Our police force is also unarmed
From what I heard you could do it in private places?
do it do what?
@undone berry isnt the knife problem a bigger issue for the UK than gun problems ? i dont understand how they have such a huge amount of knife deaths
Shoot
Knives are legal to just carry in the UK if you meet certain requirements, yeah
mate
fucking strawman that shit
you dimwitted turd
the knives problem?
you use knives for cooking
In Ireland, you cannot do that unless you can prove you have a reason to
Show us stabbings, that's my school's answer
my sub is apparently not done
not makin any steak with a glock
Bisk's sub is a metaphor for this convosation
piers, don't you use your semi-automatic death machine to cut up your dinner?
also you can own a rifle and take it home but the licensing is very strict in the UK
I like to
Owez you continue to mystify me
I like to cook burgers with it. Get the barrel hot, sear, then repeat til its done
it's nl steel, folded 1000 time
it's called glockamole, a southern staple
Gives it a nice metallic flavour
hahah
You can spell metaphor but not were
glockamole
that's probably the best thing you've done in this conversation
❤️
and most productive
Lol glockamole
i think my solutions are reasonable
what's your biggest beef with my suggestions bisk
i direct you to the rest of the world's sensible gun laws
my answer has already been given by about ~90 countries across the planet
my sub is actually here now
Actually I think that one's mine
race you to it
Hahaha
if your goal is stopping willfull homicides (about 15k/yr) banning AR's wont change that. most happen with handguns. so do you ban handguns? i say, have trigger lock restrictions, no open carry, and only can use on route to a range or hunting area, and national medical background checks. that solution actually addresses the problem, which is most willful homicides in the USA happen with legally acquired handguns...
It does though
well that's one way to do it. could you impelment banning handguns in the USA within the next 10 years? how would you do that?
Buyback+make them illegal
ban guns, eat subs.
Bisk your sub is getting cold, better warm it and spend 5 more mins here
That’s how you get a civil war, I fear.
Too late
yeah that's the civil war recipe
lol owez is ready for civil war with the smiley face
Nah, I just brought some napalm. 😛
Have you seen the little boy?
It's not hard to ban guns
you don't just fucking
outright go "ok guns illegal now"
it's the blowback, not the act itself ya goober
you take the money out of trump's wall and you use it to buy back everyone's guns
well there ya go
if you give them a good deal then you will get the majority of them off of the streets
No.
worked in several countries already
*several countries without equivalent 2A laws
the US is not as special as it likes to think
Those countries weren’t the US.
gdude have you been to the US
No, luckily
ah, you're missing out!
On what? Salmonella
And an incredibly high proportion of gun violence
Even with insurance - salmonella is no fun
there are lots of nice countries in the world. Not sure why the US would be top of the list
are people actually worried they'll be involved in gun violence if they travel to the USA lmao. you're so much more likely to like.,.. i dont know.. die in a car accident
I knew someone who had their insurance company fly them back to the uk to get treatment for a severed knee
Not actually that likely. Just shitting on a terrible country
He flew 1st class with a splint on for 36 hours before he got to a doctor
well it's sure as hell more likely to happen to me there than it is here to be fair
Becuase it was cheaper that way
P( you die via gun | you're visiting the USA) < P( you die via car crash | you're visiting the USA)
alright
@vestal briar ok i need that policy
to be fair, the actual work I have to put in to even get into the US..
ireland needs visa?
???
they can turn you away when you arrive for any reason at all if you don't have one
well, if I get a nice person, I don't need it
it's not a legal requirement
but it does protect me to get one
plus that's a whole ocean to cross
in my head it's farther from Ireland to NYC than Ireland to Qatar
Do you not just need an ESTA? Seems fairly easy to get in the UK
at least they've stopped invasively examining devices at the border I guess
Ireland is not the UK
i thought ireland was a trump golf course with metal wind mills
... so how about those abortion laws huh ?
im joking. i was referring to the controversial late term abortion laws that are new in ... i think NY?
or a few states maybe
you can now abort 3rd trimester, before i dont think you could in NY
lol
abortion, yeah, there's a good topic for a python server.
fair
hey is the number beside your name the number for this server? that' s so cool
It's because lemon's #1
can I be on index 0
how can i remove somthing with a text file ik how to append not sure on removing
sed -i '/%s/d' ./database/Blacklist/blacklist.txt
Tryed this but doesnt remove urls
sed: -e expression #1, char 9: unknown command: `/'
error when tryna remove a url
every now and then i forget why windows virtual desktops suck and try using them again
then i rediscover the shittyness and stop again
a vicious cycle
Why does VS Code not support real time linting?
Because at its core, it's just an editor
It would have to be written as an extension or plugin in order to gain that functionality
sigh precommit flake8 hook with pipenv is not wanting to work
it's not using the pipenv virtual env
Is this with our repo or something else?
I made it to work for the code jam
yeah code jam
What is not working?
Just like anything else, it depends on your needs
No it is not
5. Do not provide or request help on projects that may break laws, breach terms of services, be considered malicious/inappropriate or be for graded coursework/exams.
I really think you're trying to take on too much at once
@low shadow do you have any idea how much resources you are wasting? people are here to help, but you ask nonsensical questions, and you don't take the answers into account, all you are doing is making people tired, and less likely they'll help other people
no you don't
speaking of pentesting. i submitted my self assessment questionnaire for this cyber security super duper or whatever for my company
it's mostly yes/no answer questions, with a commet field i assumed was for additional information
e.g. "Do you use anti-virus? Yes / No"
cyber security super duper
Please propose to them that they call it that
tick yes, in comment "except on Linux servers"
but a bit more verbose
most of the questions are like
"are firewall rules subject to regular review?"
"yes."
But APPARENTLY I'm meant to fill out EVERY SINGLE COMMENT SECTION
That's got to be unpleasant
"Has each open port on the firewall been subject to approval by an authorised business representative and documented?"
"Yes / No / No Firewall"
that'd be a yes
but that's not enough info for them
?!?!
they want examples I guess
but they don't ask for examples
it's just "customer comment"
i have no comment because it's a yes or no question ffs
"For each question a text justification can be submitted in support of the response."
doesn't sound like "please justify everything you chose."
time to call em
we used a different company for this thing when we ran another company through it
they just had some drop down boxes on a website and then boom submit
got a call off the people and explained their reasoning for the questions they had questions about
instead this is going to turn into a back and forth email chain because fuck off am i filling out ~70 comment boxes for clearly yes/no questions
Hand written or typed?
typed
Small saving grace at least
pfft, woman called me the feminine of my name in the email complaining about my response too
do you think "yes" would be a fine comment?
haha
i would rather have them tell me exactly what's wrong with it and where they need more clarification
cause i thought i clarified everything that needed to be clarified
and coming back to me like "clarify everything please" isn't nice
it's mean.
"are proxy servers used to provide controlled access to the internet for relevant machines and users?" "Yes, Sometimes, Never"
uhhhh, never.
am i supposed to justify not using something
"No, because that'd be stupid."
some of these questions feel like they're out of the 90's / 00's
Comment: Pee pee poo poo
haha
banned from twitter
Who
one of the dumbest questions in here is "are all administrator accounts only used to perform legitimate administrative activities with no access granted to external email or the internet"
now, is that systems administrator accounts
or does that mean like...
Some guy took a photo standing outside of the Twitter HQ with a sign saying "Peepee poopoo" @low shadow
you know
And twitter beaned him
the business type administrator
who administrates business
because a business administrator with no internet or email is fucking useless
and a system administrator with no internet can just switch it back on
Honestly, your thing sounds so much like my shitty A-Level IT exams a few years ago
I feel like the government is just stuck at least 10 years behind
dude i just want a shiny badge to put on our website
and some shit to brag about
but yeah, it's a government initiative
rather than being industry driven
"Does your company use "the emails"?"
Cyber Essentials is a government-backed, industry supported scheme to help organisations protect themselves against common cyber attacks.
"industry supported"
a.k.a. "i think we can cash in on this"
And most governments are behind the times. It's a big ship, and requires a lot of distance before it can finish a turn
and then it crashes into an italian island
Well at least they'll be well fed
Sure. But I feel like the relatively newly formed National Centre For Cyber Security body should be somewhat up to date
HA
their standards are great
It's still old white guys
but some of their initiatives are bit shit
Maybe this self assesment thing was just palmed off to the inerns
whilst the actual people did real work
so the interns were just pulling it out of their arses
well this is a 3rd party Info Sec company delivering it
oh sure