Yes, I mean it’s used for transactions in the programming sense of the word. Turns out financial transactions require that as well. I assume the same goes for nuclear stuff. There is just very little risk to come across uncertainties when the language is that old (and the people who use it hehe - tbf it pays super well).

Edit: at least to my very limited knowledge

Nothing yet, I was a bit lost on where to start. People here were kind enough to give me a few good starting points, so I think I’ll go from there. Thanks for linking the explanation of the OSI-model! I remember that from uni, not much of the actual content though. From what I heard in this thread is seems like a good place to go from.

Thanks so much, especially for the checklist of stuff I need to know. I know some of the stuff (or at least some basics) from an IT support job with a “historically grown” campus network hehe. Some acronyms I haven’t even heard. Also: sounds like a good reason to finally install linux again.

Thanks for the material! I’ll check it out. Not supporting https was a bit eyebrow-raising at first hehe.

I’ll look into that, ty!

Thanks for the suggestions! When you say model, do you mean the OSI model or just an actual network where I can tinker? Lettuce eat lettuce was kind enough to make a list of the basics - I’ll use that as a guideline. Others have provided material as well; it seems I do not need to worry about filling time :)

That’s what I summarised, aside from the us-centric references. I still don’t quite understand the emphasis on “true individual liberty”, what that should entail and the meaning of it for the discussion. I agree with everything else you said, that part just isn’t clear to me.

What’s your definition of liberty here? Just the absence of constraints? As in to be free from sth., opposed to being free to do sth.?

If it is, then sure you can have individual liberty. It’s just (almost) utterly useless. Or do I not get your point here?

That’s a really nice thought and I agree, but it doesn’t answer any of the practical questions the current of many countries often poses. Imo a, maybe temporary, solution that protects these artifacts is necessary.

Sadly FP will not change for these kinds of reasons, which is not saying we shouldn’t push for it nevertheless. In the meantime I fear not much good will come from an idealistic stance but rather practical solutions that at least preserve the hope we can at some point in time marvel at artifacts in their proper context. Just my opinion though

It’s important to think about the counterargument, I agree.

To counter your counterargument: it’s not a good argument on many levels (scope, allocation, distribution mechanism, effect). The main reason is that this sort of charity doesn’t improve the core problem of low(er) social mobility. The opportunity to pursue self-development/self-fulfillment should not be tied to the whimsical act of a better-off person but presented to everyone as equal as possible - through common goods and services. The impossible future is impossible due to vastly different prerequisites. The person’s “greatness” will never be seen, as most likely they will never be presented with the opportunity to display it.

To ensure that the update process finishes without interruption due to weak battery - if that happens it can brick your car. Tbf you can also just connect the battery to a power source and keep the engine off. Depending on update and car updates that take a few hours are not unheard of