Hey, my name is on that probe! Good luck with the solar plunge little dude!

I would tell you to fight me, but I guess I need to add an GTK_USE_PORTAL=1 argument to my KDE Konflict Picker first…

Tom Goa’uld

…coho on the blowho’?

…I got nothing…

It is…I would like a Fediverse video platform, but this one ain’t very cash money.

A reminder that Loops has a TOS that effectively grants them an unlimited license to use your likeness for whatever purpose they desire. Including AI generation. https://loops.video/legal/terms-of-service#7

There are a couple ‘Other - Please Specify’ fields I definitely filled out with ‘Do not do AI’.

≡(ಠ ｪ ಠ)≡

I get the joke, but with no prior context it’s kind of a jerk move to assume the player already opened it if they asked for a perception OR an investigation. A Mimic would normally just ambush you OR attack when the player opens them. If it was opened it’s probably already attacking, and if it was closed then performing a perception shouldn’t cause initiative until rolled (if the mimic noticed you noticing it, for instance).

I’ll…I’ll crawl back into my dingy nerd tavern now…

Ah, this looks like it’s a snap to use.

Supply chains are literally chains of suppliers, e.g. vendors. Your ‘simplest electronic product’ could absolutely be constrained by whom you choose to work with.

If your vendor locks you into buying from a certain source, and their vendor requires the same, and so on up the chain, how would you describe that dynamic to differentiate from a single vendor being the point of restriction?

To your point that the phrase didn’t exist, here are three supply-chain oriented papers that directly reference the phrase: This paper is exploring the social dynamics of buyers and sellers:

Lock-in situations in supply chains: A social exchange theoretic study of sourcing arrangements

Specifically, we believe that the examination of lock-in situations between a manufacturer and its supplier, i.e., instances where for all intent and purposes, one party is heavily dependent upon the other party, with few alternatives, under social exchange theory, can provide new insights into controlled self-interest behaviors (e.g., strategies) in on-going supply chain relationships.

This paper is about supply chains in plastic management, but the phrase is here:

Business models and sustainable plastic management: A systematic review of the literature

Barriers frequently mentioned were high costs, complexity of new systems, supply chain lock-in and low customer buy-in.

And here’s a paper about optimizing your supply chain where it is referenced as something to avoid:

Orchestrating cradle-to-cradle innovation across the value chain

This one even has a handy definition:

Supply chain lock-in:

Contracts and strong dependencies with suppliers not supporting circularity (e.g., either due to non-willingness or lock-in in production facilities optimized for linear concepts). 

I suppose if you would like to be super extra pendantic Wikipedia does have you covered with “Collective Monopolistic Vendor Lock-in”.

Try another search engine: https://xo.wtf/search?q=what+is+supply-chain+lock-in

Can you share what the final desired goal is? It sounds like your goal is actually to provide your services to Bob securely over the internet, is that a fair description? You mentioned eventually grabbing a domain, how do you feel about publicly exposed services with authentication? For instance, I use authentik in front of Jellyfin and paperless myself for a little extra authentication juice.

unrepentant nano gang rise up

I’ve passed through my GPU for acceleration purposes which has worked pretty well. I don’t see a passed-through GPU in your screenshot. I’ll assume you turned on the correct IOMMU and SR-IOV settings, added the PCI:E hardware to that VM, and made sure it showed up inside the guest OS?

“Wow, this half developed feature is so interesting, here’s a list of improvements that should be made to make it fun!” are 3/4s of the comments on that thread.

‘Proud’ owner of a 300i, still waiting on that ‘Rework’ from 2014 2018 ???.

That’s a pretty good question. I 💯 agree that it can fall into authoritarian colonial bullshit, and in fact that’s probably what I was thinking of in terms of ‘defining’ vs ‘advancing’. I’ll invoke the case of the ‘Sad Puppies’, a bunch of lame ass white men who were super mad that the Hugos were overwhelmingly going to ‘not white men’ (read: interesting BIPOC voices everyone loves and gasp…women?!).

I would probably claim the Sad Puppies tried to define culture.

The rest of the attendees advanced it by telling them to fuck right off.

Pumpkins Georg, who lives in spooky bog & disposes of over 15 million pumpkins every day, is an outlier and should not have been counted.

Is defining culture the same as advancing culture?

It sucks, but as someone who hosts their own services and supports business clients: If they have a budget, Office365 all the way. Does it suck paying money to M$? Oh hell yeah. But it’s a ‘cost of doing business’. Don’t screw around if they can afford it, just go O365 :(