https://github.com/perfect-dark-pc-port/perfect_dark

Ported it to OpenBSD for fun an evening about a year ago.

However, this part: "Since this is going to be a bare-bones web server we can remove most of the sets.". This is not great advice. Reducing the number of sets even on a headless server can lead to issues with ports depending on libraries Xenocara provides that would then be missing (fonts, etc.). Likewise, when you upgrade the default is to install all sets unless you manually intervene, which could lead to a surprise bump in disk usage that you may not have accounted for. In general, reducing the number of sets should be considered "I am deviating from the defaults and I know what I am doing" territory and Theo keeps threatening to remove the option to select the sets in the installer when people complain and I am inclined to agree with him. So, if you have 10GB of disk in that Droplet, just do the OpenBSD thing and go with the defaults and you will be all the happier for it down the line. Messing with the installation size really is for those rare cases (fitting many VMs on a single host, ancient machines, etc.) where you have no other choice.

[1]: https://www.phoenixstraps.com

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48137854

Have asked them to stop numerous times and they just keep hitting for about eight months now.

https://modretro.com/products/xibalba-64

https://krikzz.com/our-products/cartridges/rgb-blaster.html

It is a lot of work and usually not cheap to get old consoles to capture properly, so I am only bothering with Nintendo consoles as that is what my childhood was. At the time of writing, I have solutions to play games on original hardware from every console apart from the Nintendo 64 and Nintendo DS family. Not because it is not possible, but rather that I can not justify the expense at the moment.

[1]: https://man.netbsd.org/NetBSD-11.x-BRANCH/bluetooth.3

[2]: https://man.openbsd.org/OpenBSD-5.5/bluetooth.4

There is a lot of sharing going on between the BSDs. Most commonly drivers being handed back and forth.

It is a shame that the OpenBSD folks do not reprint their old designs as I would buy about ten different ones in an instant.

[1]: https://www.openbsd.org/tshirts.html#4

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobias_L%C3%BCtke#Voting_right...

About Taiwan. I find the claim that since an absolute monarchy controlled the island 150 years ago, that then a government which was the result of two (is my count correct?) revolutions overthrowing that monarchy and then another government, a government which failed to conquer the land by military means by 1950, and now after people have lived independently for over 75 years (over 25 of which as a democracy) that said government has any right to dictate how said people should live to be simply absurd. If the people of the RoC wants to join with the PRC, that is for them to decide through their own decision processes. Historical claims like this may make sense for unpopulated tracts of land, but here we are talking about the rights to self-determination of more than twenty million people of which the vast majority were born well after 1950. This would set a terrible precedence and, frankly, it feels akin to how emperors and kings of old asserted their "rights" and not how we move towards a more just world.

Also, Hong Kong? If anything, Hong Kong shows that the PRC is a poor custodian for a pluralistic country with multiple parallel systems. I once thought it reasonable for Hong Kong to be "returned" after the historical travesty that were the Opium Wars, but I have heard enough first-hand accounts of the suffering and tragedy that unfolded over the last ten years to reconsider whether I prioritise history over the people that are alive here and now. It was not that Mao and Xi "unfortunately had to use force" against Tibet and Hong Kong. These were calculated choices on their part and history shall judge them the same way we judge any other oppressor for their moral failures.

Rather, I think we should look hard into ourselves and what is good and bad about the current world order. For example, the people of the RoC have the right to determine which direction they want to go. Regardless of the chauvinistic rhetoric coming out of Beijing. We should all stand up for this, because it is a universal right that we want everyone to enjoy. Similarly, we should push against the Eleven-dash line and support the 2013 ruling. The list goes on and I am sure these issues can be resolved without an outright war if we are careful, yet firm, in our beliefs and also diplomatically preemptive and thoughtful.

Being concerned about PRC imperialism should not be mistaken for the position that their people should "know their place" and be suppressed back to the stone age. They have the right to enjoy the fruits of their labour and pursue happiness, just like everyone else. We simply must be there to remind them (just like we must remind ourselves) that the course of humanity is a collective project if we are to stay clear of the darker sides of our nature as we venture together into the future.

The way I look at it, until Deng the PRC's economic policies and internal instability kept it from growing at the pace of many of its neighbours. Then we had an era of intense growth (which is still to some degree ongoing). However, as a reaction to this era Xi and others needed a narrative to counter the increased corruption and a new unifying myth to replace the cult of growth as the economy would stagnate at some point and could then call into question the authority of CCP to rule. Their choice of nationalism is what scares me and I know PRC citizens (even CCP members) that share this perspective and would rather have seen the Shanghai clique to have remained. It is possible that in this alternative reality we would still end up with "Imperialism with Chinese characteristics" ("中国特色帝国主义"?), but I chose to believe that at the very least the chances of this would have been smaller.

To me, the PRC is at the very end of that process and I recommend anyone doubting this to go and read conversations and listen to the words of the populace that is turning increasingly nationalistic and you will hear the same old tales of revanchism and exceptionalism that we are used to hearing (during my recent visit, I watched the morning news every day for about a week and without fail a military inspection, new ship, new plane, etc. was presented each day). In addition, I think those outside of Asia are very much shielded from the early signs, but go and read about PRC influence and tensions in South Korea, Japan, RoC, Philippines, Vietnam, Laos, Myanmar, India, Pakistan, and Tajikistan and you will see something rather different than "inward-looking". To me, here the PRC is simply testing the waters for the extent of the influence of other powers and how far it can go. Likewise, we are seeing overseas naval bases being constructed which sure is an indication for a desire to project power outwards.

I want to believe that this time it will be different. I really do. Apologists around me say "It will only be Taiwan and the South China Sea, then then it will stop." and I would love to believe them. But can anyone truly internalise the narrative that international utopia will be spearheaded by a deeply authoritarian state that controls information like no other (and gladly exports that technology), disappears its own population at will, spins an increasingly strong nationalistic narrative, etc.? No, sorry, I think the "inward-looking" narrative is simply a convenient way for us to close our eyes and find comfort in ignorance, rather than in facts.

There is also this:

https://gothub.org

[1]: https://xcancel.com/markus_allard

Sure, you find the odd reasonably put politic position. But, mostly, it is memes. Screaming. Ranting. Insults. Calling the head of the Swedish police a "crying bitch". Retweets of posts from who are not even shy in terms of being bigots and racists. The man is a toxic toad and I would rather have seen him paid to shut up than anything else. Yes, we need diverse viewpoints to be heard and we should be respectful and careful to shut them down. But, Allard is not this person and he is just ruining public discourse even further and waging an insane culture war (in my mum's constituency at that). Call me old-fashioned, but I expect representatives to at least try to strive towards holding morals and behaviour above the mean of society.

I have read Mullvad's blog post, but not Berntsson' yet (it is bloody long and I am at work, but skimming it, I saw nothing arguing why "public discourse arson" is warranted and just "something needs to be done, this is something"), so maybe I am missing some context. But if the answer to your question is "Bank-roll Allard", maybe it is time to take a step back and ask yourself what on Earth your question was in the first place? Because it seems to me like you are playing with fire and risk burning all that we hold dear to the ground. Do your views not have a Johan Norberg-like [2] character (something very rare, a Swedish Libertarian that has contributed to public discourse for over twenty years) that you can support instead? Or is the direction you want to see only professed by people that behave very close to what I would describe as the very worst our species have to offer?

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johan_Norberg

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43202117

I should emphasise that DeepMind (based in London and having a very large degree of independence until the merger in 2023) and Google DeepMind (remember now that Google's research labs across the globe got merged into this entity, including the one in London that was previously split from DeepMind "proper", so it can be hard to tell at times what one means by "DeepMind") has always produced good research. But what led to the LLM explosion primarily came from Google Research Mountain View (Transformer), Google Research Seattle (BERT), OpenAI (GPT-3), and various academic labs. During this time DeepMind had a broad research agenda, but my impression is that most resources went towards more traditional deep learning agents in 3D environments, foundational algorithmic research, and games (StarCraft 2). I would provide more detail, but as as an NLP researcher, I did frankly not pay much attention to DeepMind in that era as what was interesting to me just came from elsewhere.

When Google made its first big move into LLMs, its first interesting work did not come out of DeepMind, but rather again Mountain View with PaLM in 2022. Someone with closer connections to Demis at the time can probably explain why the research agenda was what it was, but I lack those connections and DeepMind (even now) has been notoriously tight-lipped since the founding of OpenAI (Demis allegedly sees OpenAI as founded on DeepMind technology by interns and staff walking out on them and remember OpenAI's initial focus on games with Dota 2 compared to DeepMind's with StarCraft 2) and was rather insular compared to Google Research, FAIR, etc. I say "was", but not because DeepMind is now more open, but rather that all industry research outlets are now incredibly tight-lipped after LLMs becoming a product and point of pride among them. At this point, research is held back for maybe even a year before publication or never published at all to deny any perceived advantage to the competition.

https://github.com/openbsd/www/commits/master

My experience is that minor improvements tend to get accepted if they come with a solid technical motivation and fits into the overall OpenBSD mindset and ecosystem. If the change is simply justified by "best practices" and is rather large, then the conservative choice of just leaving things as they are usually prevail.

For example, I think I have seen two proposals for major overhauls of the OpenBSD.org homepage by "outsiders" over the last three years or so and they were both rejected. However, as you can see by the commit log, minor improvements (including presentation ones) happen all the time.