Skip Navigation

Posts
8
Comments
390
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • I need a bigger nerd than me to explain how much Apple users need to worry about this.

  • I could get laser surgery, but I choose glasses. I prefer how I look with them than without them, and sometimes they double as eye protection.

  • I saw Rick Astley way before the Japanese landscape. Does that mean I’m terminally online?

  • This is why weird was a terrible choice of attack words in the last election. Weird is good.

  • I didn’t know that, thanks for the extra info.

  • To everyone who hasn’t read the article, this kind of seems like nothing major to me. Before I continue, I want to say that I don’t know much about Dawkins’ stance on trans rights, so I’m just going exclusively off of what I read in this article. If someone knows something I don’t, please forgive my ignorance.

    Basically, the freedom from religion foundation published a paper saying that they can’t define what a woman is. Another author published a rebuttal that was saying that, while that may be true for the psychological definition of a woman, the biological definition of one can be quantified by the presence of specific biological traits.

    The freedom from religion foundation then retracted that article without telling the author that they were going to do so, and issued a statement saying that a woman is whatever she says she is. They seemingly ignored the intent of the article, making the author look like a bigot even though he expressly said he didn’t have any qualms with the LGBTQ+ community, and was only speaking about biology.

    Dawkins found the retraction to be unprofessional, and then chose to withdraw from the board of that organization. It seems like it had less to do with a personal opinion about trans people, and more to do with the professional standards of an organization.

    For the record, I support trans people and their rights, I’m just relaying what I got from this article since a lot of people here expressed that they would not read it.

  • I have about 60TB in mine. Media, man. Collecting is addictive.

  • I’m basically trying to do exactly what you are describing in your first paragraph. As I understand it, OBS Studio wants the camera directly connected to the device it is on, and MistServer allows it to be remotely connected from a different device on the local network. I’m trying to use Tailscale to create a local-ish network environment.

    I haven’t heard of Dararhei before—I will definitely investigate that to see if it is a better solution than MistServer. From a cursory look, it seems like they basically do the same thing.

  • Because OBS studio allows me to have more control of the stream, do overlays on the screen, etc. I need to remotely connect to that software, and then it broadcasts it to Kick, YouTube, etc.

    If I stream directly, then it will cut the stream if I lose cell connection, which is likely at times in Mexico, and I will basically be stuck to streaming on one service at a time.

    The other advantage of having overlays with my username is that it will help people find me if I get clipped and put on YouTube by viewers.

    This is an example of a service that does what I’m trying to do, but I’m trying to do the same thing for much cheaper:

    https://irltoolkit.com/

  • Bruh, pirate? I’m talking about a livestream. A livestream of me that I will broadcast to an audience. Totally legal, no copyright—my original content.

  • Care to give me a hint?

  • To stream IRL in Mexico.

  • My apartment has internet that is just ok—I wanted the more reliable connection. I will be streaming IRL, so I can’t be on the local network.

    They have streaming server services, but they are $100 per month, and I can get a high bandwidth VPS for much cheaper, and I have the tech skills to set things up myself. Just stumbling at the final hurdle here.

  • Why don’t y’all have water fountains?

  • Guns

    Jump
  • You are correct, I misspoke there. I was intending to say that I wasn’t saying the burglars were worse than the murderer—it just came out wrong.

  • Guns

    Jump
  • Agreed. Never said he wasn’t.

  • Guns

    Jump
  • Never said that. You are taking everything I say and twisting it.

    The man is a murderer, the intruders are burglars, everyone sucks here. That is the only point I have ever made in this thread.

  • Guns

    Jump
  • And the others probably would have been convicted of burglary if they lived, what’s your point?