notabot

These things are usually buried somewhere in the small print, and it might even have been in some “hey, look at this exciting new prek we git you” email from your employer when you/they joined the scheme. It might have been something like “Any items we provide to assist with member’s physical therapy remain the property of <evilcorp> at all times, and must be returned at the end of the therapy”.

Just treat the tablet as what it was provided as, a way to access their app, and be ready to return it afterwards.

Been there. A word to the wise: never decided that the best way to avoid multiple walks to the kitchen is to fill a mug with espressos and then drink it at your desk. Colours start to make sounds, everything moves too slowly, you feel a sense of impending doom, and your heart makes a spirited attempt to leave your body.

The way he’s sitting reminds me of the “I don’t always … but when I do I …” meme.

Bear in mind that they already have your home address, as they sent the tablet to you, that address is geolocated, and anyone with a phobe passing near you will have enumerated any wifi networks and possibly bluetooth too and geolocated those.

They already know what devices are around you unless there’s not been a phone within range since you got them.

You were sent the tablet in order to be able to access the the app they provide. I strongly suspect that it is actually a loan, and they will want it back when you are finished with it. Given that, you shouldn’t even attempt to root it. Use it for what it is intended for, gain some benefit from that, hopefully get your massager, and return the tablet when you’re finished with it.

Unless you deliberately give them more information, there’s not much new they can gain about your environment from the tablet. What you do in the app is going to be much more valuable data to them as it’ll give them information about you and your health that they could not gain any other way.

They’re publishing articles that are completely false, which suggests failures are the writing and editorial levels, whether or nit they use an LLM. It’s going to take a lot of high quality, accurate, articles to regain my trust.

It looks like the article was AI, it’s been pulled from the site.

Blast. This sounded like really positive news, linux as an ecosystem desperately needs to revisit its init process choices, but there really doesn’t seem to be any hint of it elsewhere. There is a rye that’s written in rust and which has an init command rye init. I wonder if it’s a case of an LLM latching on to that and just making up the rest?

Surely we all know crayons are deicious? I like the green ones best.

If you are just a user, in that a computer is just a tool you use, then you’re right, there’s comparatively little reason to be concerened or even know about the underlying details of the system. If you go further and start making changes to your system, or even building more complex systems, over time you will find yourself forming quite firm opinions about various parts of the underlying system, especially if you’ve had experience with other options.

Honestly, I’m not sure, I was looking at Devuan, but then noticed that Debian supported sysvinit natively so I went that route instead. I figure that sticking to the source distro was going to give me fewer headaches, and so far it’s been plain sailing.

Debian, installed without systemd as per the wiki. So far I’ve not hit any issues, whilst I’ve recently ended up diving through both kernel and systemd code to find the root cause of an issue I was hitting on one server. I could have just bodged past it, but I wanted to actually understand what the issue was, and what else it was going to affect.