foo

I use Grub for my bootloader so I’m probably not the best person to ask for rEFind problems, but a good place to start for everything Arch related is the wiki. The page for rEFInd has a configuration section that outlines where the config files are and how to read them. Check that everything there matches what you expect it to be: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/REFInd#Configuration.

If you’ve verified that your bootloader config is correct and it’s installed on the drive you’re booting from correctly another config to check is /etc/fstab to ensure you have a root device set in there too. The wiki is your friend here too: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Fstab

You’ll need to post more info about your bootloader/fstab config. The error ERROR: device ' ' not found implies there’s something set to an empty string.

Don’t feed the trolls y’all.

What does this have to do with Linux?

I use a mix of shell commands, terminal file manager, and GUI file manager depending on the task at hand.

The terminal file managers are quicker to navigate to a particular file/directory since it doesn’t require typing commands but I can still navigate with a few key strokes as opposed to using a GUI.

deleted by creator

Ongoing, I max out my retirement funds every year.

Yeah that’s a good point. My recent contributions were certainly focused around mid 2020 - mid 2021. I’m at roughly 70% VTSAX, and then 10% each VTIAX, VGSLX, and VUSTX.

Do you think it’s worth cutting losses in VGSLX and reinvesting in VTSAX? I guess it depends on how much prolonged high interest rates are going to continue to weigh on the real estate sector.

It’s split across a few accounts so it’s difficult to put a single, exact percentage on, but I’m at roughly 70% VTSAX, and then 10% each VTIAX, VGSLX, and VUSTX.

I’ve shied away from target date funds because I’ve wanted to have more control over the underlying allocations (potentially to my own detriment, I’ll accept responsibility for that).

I think so? It’s the performance chart from Vanguard.

Yeah, I’m definitely not planning on taking it out. I still have a long way to go before retirement. I was more concerned about if I’m investing into the right funds and if my returns were anomalous for the given time period.

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1325905

Liferea has “search folders” that let you define conditions for which stories/feeds show up in them.

No. Reasons:

• You can’t make more land. The feasible land around most cities has already been built on. Either you increase urban sprawl further (not considered desirable) or you build new cities.
• NIMBYs: What about increasing density? Sure, but this requires rezoning which NIMBYs and the “save our neighborhoods” types will fight tooth and nail. And even if it does succeed, you also need utility and transportation upgrades to accommodate more people which costs money and creates more NIMBYs fighting anything that might affect them or the “views” from their property.
• Labor shortages. There have been too few people going into the trades for decades now. As the previous boomers retire there’s too few people to replace them. This drives up construction costs considerably.
• Materials costs, on average, will only go up. For example, the logging industry in the US has been decimated over the past few decades resulting in higher costs for raw materials. This too increases construction costs.
• Complexity in building codes and permits is far more than it previously was. In the area I live the amount of red tape to get through in order to get a building permit can easily eat up years of time and tens of thousands of dollars just for one single family home, and that’s before a single shovel hits the ground. Increase that considerably for multi-family home buildings or larger subdivision projects.

For whatever reason, it seems like many people focus on the real estate speculators, and while that’s undoubtedly part of the problem, the costs and red tape of actually building new housing is often ignored. When population increases and you can’t increase supply there’s no where for prices to go but up. The root cause of the problem needs to first be addressed which is the need to build more housing and that’s not a simple problem to solve since it involves the intersection of so many other problems. Therefore I can’t say I’m optimistic that housing will go anywhere but up.

Sure, but what exactly does this video reveal? All I got out of it was that they have a helicopter with various cameras and radios to communicate with. I’d hardly call that “revealing state trooper surveillance capabilities, tactics, and communications.” Is it really something that’s not already common knowledge?

That’s a false equivalency. Gay sex is an act between consenting adults. I’ll copy what I wrote in another comment in this thread on the issue of blocking a highway:

In the case of this road thing, my concern stems from people, at night, flooding onto a highway. There’s a good chance multiple people are hit, and killed at those speeds, possibly involving multiple vehicles, maybe a semi-truck. Even the drivers of the cars could be hit by other cars and hurt themselves. Short of that, you have the psychological toll to live with of having accidentally killed someone. It’s really just a bad idea all around on top of not being an effective protest method. For those reasons, I do believe the police acted appropriately to show up, and arrest the people doing it.

That’s alright, I still like you.

I know I said I was out, but I wanted to say thanks for a thoughtful reply. I’m always happy to have discourse without vitriol so I’ll add some more thoughts here.

I think you are being absurd, because our democracy is in critical danger, and you’re worried about a road.

For the record, I’m not at all downplaying the corruption and illegality of the Trump administration. I wholeheartedly support the current criminal court cases going against him and, while I believe all defendants are innocent until proven guilty (doing otherwise would be to turn our backs on one of the tenants of a functioning democracy), I do hope to see him convicted of his crimes once proven in a court of law. I could write a lot more here, but I think we’re basically on the same page with this so I’ll spare the full sermon on the dangers of MAGAism.

In the case of this road thing, my concern stems from people, at night, flooding onto a highway. There’s a good chance multiple people are hit, and killed at those speeds, possibly involving multiple vehicles, maybe a semi-truck. Even the drivers of the cars could be hit by other cars and hurt themselves. Short of that, you have the psychological toll to live with of having accidentally killed someone. It’s really just a bad idea all around on top of not being an effective protest method. For those reasons, I do believe the police acted appropriately to show up, and arrest the people doing it.

On the topic of police, in general this is a difficult topic for me that I honestly don’t really feel qualified to speak on generally so I typically stay silent on it. That’s not because of an unwillingness to help but because I don’t believe in speaking on topics that I don’t feel qualified to speak on. You’re right that I’ve never had bad experiences with police to the point that I felt their actions were unethical or illegal. In fact, in my life I’ve personally known a handful of police officers and each one of them I found to be ethical people who wanted to live peaceful lives and do the right thing with their job. But I also recognize there are many instances of problematic (to put it lightly) policing and have seen many instances in the news demonstrating that. I also recognize that, in general, humans in positions of power tend to abuse that power. That’s why civilian oversight and accountability of police is paramount. That’s something that’s clearly lacking currently given the strength of police unions, as one example. Overall, I think it’s a system that needs reform, but I wouldn’t go so far as to throw out the whole system because what would it be replaced with? You can’t have a society without some way to enforce laws (like enforcing illegal and dangerous protests), but you also can’t have a police state. That’s what I mean by there’s a difficult nuance here, but I also recognize that I don’t know what that is and why I’m hesitant to even type this up right now. That’s also not to diminish your experiences, I’m sure they’re just as valid as mine, likely moreso given your experiences and my comparative lack thereof. I’d be happy to learn more about them if you want to share.

Calling people “fuckers”, “chodes”, etc. is part of my vernacular, as with many others of my generation; you shouldn’t take it so hard. The point isn’t to degrade you, but to snap your attention.

I’ve been on the internet for long enough to have been called much worse names many times before, I have a pretty thick skin at this point (see the other person on this thread telling me how I’m a fucktard and no one likes me, again, as if that’s going to accomplish anything). My point here was though that text based communication carries a negativity bias with it. In that we tend to assume bad intent and starting with language like that only serves to immediately make folks retreat to their corners where no constructive dialog can be made. Ultimately your goal is to sway more people to your side, right? The most effective way to do that is to engage with them rather than use what is traditionally considered offensive language in an attempt to get their attention.

In short, my general view is that the best, and really only, way to preserve democracy is to support its institutions. Those same institutions that told Trump “no” when he tried to falsely claim he won the 2020 election. I know they’re not perfect, but tearing down those institutions instead of reforming and strengthening them is not the way to preserve a democracy in times of trouble. Call me naive and idealistic, maybe I am, but at the end of the day governments are based on the faith of the people that live under them. I have to maintain my faith in America’s democratic institutions because without that faith they crumble and die which is exactly what neither of us want to see happen.

Protest SHOULD be disruptive, like strikes, which actually affect change! While those protesting (actual patriots, take notes) are risking their lives (literally), you’re slightly inconvenienced.

Sure, strike all you want. That’s not putting yourself and drivers on a highway in danger. Or shining a laser into a helicopter blinding the pilot while flying over a populated area. Indeed these people are risking their lives, but also putting other’s lives at risk too, especially when doing this stunt at night in the middle of an active highway. It’s not just a slight inconvenience, it’s stupid, misplaced, and irresponsible.

But alright my man, if that’s how you feel so be it, it’s your prerogative to be angry and call the people that would otherwise support your cause a “chode” and telling them to “fuck off” multiple times. The reason we’re in this situation is because of the anger and extremism. You know, I used to have a harder line on all of this stuff too, but after spending time having real conversations with people I disagreed with came around to realize that internet discourse is pure sensationalism and doesn’t reflect the real world. If we could turn down the volume then this extremism on both sides would not be necessary. Fighting fire with fire is always a losing game for both sides.

If you’d be willing to have an open mind for 15 minutes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVV2Zk88beY

Anyway, I’m out. I came to this community for tech privacy issues, but it’s quickly turning into conspiracy and political theater so I unjoined it entirely. Take care.