Yeah, and the benefit to society comes in the form of the widgets it so desperately needs.

And also the people it employs and the effect to the greater economy. All of those things are benefits to society, for which people are prepared to give the directors and shareholders some level of protection, as part of a bargain. If the factory provides less benefit, why should the people taking the profit get the same level of protection?

Um you do realise that Monday Night Rehabilitation (i.e. executing people with monster trucks in a TV spectacle with the president often in attendance) was a satire based on the words people use with the current justice system, i.e. "rehabilitation" and how it actually treats people.

I have to ask did you actually think I was literally proposing taking something from idiocracy and implementing it in real life?

The purpose of a factory is not to provide jobs.

It's intended to made widgets that can then be sold at a profit.

It's not a social welfare program.

Only kinda. Let me remind you there is no natural right to limited liability companies. They exist purely (in principle) for the benefit of society.

ad hominem. You literally can't attack the argument and your argument is so poor to being with, that you attack the person rather than the argument.

It's okay. I'm sorry you're retarded. I really am.

Nightmare Eclipse showed us Bitlocker is a joke. It's not remotely real encryption and easily breakable .. on Win11/2025 server, NOT Win 10. This wasn't an exploit. It was a backdoor. Meanwhile Veracrypt needed a public backlash to get their dev signing keys reinstated so people could get their updated kernel drivers on Windows (and remember, TrueCrypt its predecessor mysteriously disappeared in 2012 with the former author telling people to use BitLocker instead!)

Now we have this. The answer should be obvious: there is a concerted effort to remove all real encryption, security and privacy from our software. This isn't incompetency mistaken for malice. This has to be intentional.

That's why systemd has been systematically making interoperability with grub and encryption more difficult, in no small part.

Oh cool so they fixed all the problems!

Simplification?

There was no simplification. It was all markedly more complicated and interdependent. That was literally the primary selling point of systemd, aside from "faster boot times".

What are the discreet benefits to the "1000s of containers at scale" scenario you mention which are satisfied with systemd which could not be or were not satisfied with init?

There was not a lack of uniformity before. In fact, it was more consistent and uniform before systemd at a system level.

The only benefit systemd provides is integration with eg. pulse audio - another one of this shmuck's horrible projects - and desktop integration. While that is potentially useful in and of itself, it didn't need to be done in such a massive, integrated, monolithic Microsoft-like fashion.

It'd be nice if people would use all this excess coding capacity as provided by AI to clean up the human written bloat slop they've been churning out for the past 20 years...

There is so much wrong with what you said it's hard to fathom.

> Your problem starts here. Right to privacy is a human right

Show me where in the American constitution where you have a right to privacy? The 4th amendment is against unreasonable search and seizure. It's a hard steep climb from that to privacy as a right. Now that Planned Parenthood v Cassey and Row v Wade have been repealed, it's even a harder sell.

> you cannot lose a human right

Who gives you rights? This entire concept of "human rights" is very recent. The earliest beginnings may have been the Magna Carta in the 1200s, but the entirety of Roman, Sumerian, Arcadian and other civilizations knew no such concept. Roman Citizens had certain legal standings in societies, and that citizenship could be earned, but it's a far cry to say they had a concept of "rights," in the way we've had for only the past few centuries. You can absolutely 100% lose a "human right" anytime you travel outside an area subject to the jurisdiction of a nation you hold allegiance to which has given you those rights.

Rights are bestowed by the State, often fought for by citizens, and are only enforced by collective belief. Is the Freedom of Speech a human right? Because it literally exists no where outside America. Europeans can go to prison for questioning verboten parts of history. British people can go to prison for teaching their dog to raise a paw in a German salute for a comedy bit. New Zealand has a national censor who decides when news content is illegal for people to possess. Only Japan gets even remotely close.

> regardless of what you do. It can be temporarily restricted if another thing has priority, but it cannot be removed

Distinction without a difference. You have no rights in prison. There are two legal forms of slavery in America: The military and prison ... both are voluntary when you really think about it. Your rights are totally removed. You don't get all of them back in most states. Gun ownership and voting are often restricted. Now I think that's wrong and those rights should be restored, but what you may wish for isn't realize. Sex offender lists are another one.

> Hence people like you are into violating human rights and as soon as that starts to be a general sentiment, a state/group/organization is on a very dark path. Yes, you may be able to get some statistic to look better this way. But you have lost something far more valuable.

What strawman directed bullshit. You drew all that out from my limited statement, making deep connections with my philosophy on rights, with made up arguments I never even tried to make? Going back to the original statement, do you not think we should allow these groups to pool together prisoner information using search technology to try to at least get some of them out that can turn around an contribute to society? I don't even know what argument you're making.

All they need is to fully implement Monday Night Rehabilitation. Then the recidivism rate will drop to zero.

I think the idea is identifying people most likely to succeeded and get them out. This makes slightly more sense for LLMs, if you're just talking about reading a lot of public data for people who have no right to privacy anyway due to the harm they caused others.

16% sounds pretty low, but it's probably reasonable. There are a lot of people in prison who can't be let out. I'm sorry, you stab someone, the chance of rehabilitation is very low. If they get 20 years, they need to stay in 20 years. Maybe they'll be too old to hurt anyone then, or the time will make them realize how shit they are. Most often a lot, they'll commit a violent crime again and then won't get out ever. I think of this tragic case of a woman who befriended her mom's killer and was then murdered by him after she helped him get parole:

https://people.com/crime/ark-w...

There is a kind of suicidal empathy in wanting to help everyone on the street or in the prison system. It denies the realize that for over half the people on the street, they have literally fucked over all their friends, all their family members and anyone who could possibly help them. Their friends are now others on the street who have done the same. Some people don't get in the loop. One of my best friends is a court reporter, and despite all the awful stuff she has to record, she also sees people who come into the court room, cleaned up, their lives turned around and coming off probation. So people can turn around their lives, but they have to want it.

I'm just glad this article wasn't about trying to use AI chatbots to directly change behavior of inmates. That would just be straight up AI-psychosis talk.

Ah i see, so an alternative to those coffee pod machines? Less plasticky.

That makes complete sense

It does. One thing I noticed back in the day during the big switcheroo is that my Arch laptop (eee 900) started to boot slower when systemd came in. Maybe they fixed that now, this was a while ago but it did not live up to the hype and even its own rationale in that regard originally.

So I'm not saying the reasons behind systemd were poor, but the implementation left something to be desired, it was quite buggy originally (it's mostly been beaten into shape), and quite a lot of it is just really mediocre and opinionated.

Does it work? Mostly. Does it do some stuff that was painful under sysv? Sure. It is good software? Not really.