Tildes is a very serious site, where we discuss very serious matters like fathers, ux and tom scott. Tags culled from the highest voted topics from the last seven days, if anyone was paying attention.

But one of my favourite tags happens to be offbeat! Taking its original inspiration from Sir Nils Olav III, this thread is looking for any far-fetched offbeat stories lurking in the newspapers. It may not deserve its own post, but it deserves a wider audience!

Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Houthi rebels in Yemen, and militias in Iraq and Syria.

Whenever western media outlets speak of these groups they seem to prefix the term Iranian-Backed.

I'm starting to raise my eyebrows a bit at how universally the term is being used. It feels almost mandated. My understanding is these are indeed supported financially and materially by Iran, but they also very much operate independently. So the extent of the relationship is unknown or at least debated.

Does this strike anyone else as odd or suspicious? Is this use fair and justified?

My mind can't help but wander to the laying of a propaganda foundation for direct conflict with Iran.

I enjoy writing letters, but my hands have progressively hurt more and more from handwriting. For a time, I tried typing letters on my computer, the personal feeling of my letters diminished. Having printed it out, looking clean and mechanically perfect made my letters feel less valuable, they didn't feel like I spent time on them.

So, for the last few years, I've typed letters on two older typewriters and that has felt like a happy medium. I make mistakes and have to fix them, sometimes the text looks odd or the paper moves, I love it.

I have two questions I need help with:

1. Does anyone know of a mechanical typewriter that doesn't utilize the rolling pin to secure the paper? When I write on cards, they have to be bent and sometimes they never retain their former shape. I'd also like to get into journaling this way, but can't feed a whole journal through the rolling pin.

2. Can anyone think of other ways I could write letters, other than the methods I've listed already, that may bring a personal nature to my letters?

Thanks!

Last year I inquired how one might take sea passage across the Atlantic. The realistic answer is that there are various ocean liners and transatlantic cruises traveling multiple times per year, none faster than 7 days and many taking closer to 10 or 14. Repositioning cruises, when the ship is being moved from one region to another and you just tag along, are infrequent but the cheapest option.

In February, I will unavoidably be in the United Kingdom. I am flying there, but have not purchased a flight back yet. I am thinking about taking a ship in repositioning from England to the US Eastern Seaboard as there is very conveniently one such ship leaving a couple days after my event is over. That would probably be Southampton to Miami (from there, I would take a train home) and would take 11 or so days, zero of which are at intermediary ports.

I was thinking about a ship over a plane because the last time I flew it was like my ears got blown out for an entire day afterward. I don't know what it is about my sinuses but they have never handled flying well. My height makes the experience particularly cramped and unpleasant and I have gotten sick on every plane I have taken in the last six months. It's the most miserable thing I do to myself on a regular basis.

Unfortunately, all the research I can find on passenger ship emissions seem to indicate that it is worse for the environment on a passenger-mile basis than flying that same route, at least as far as cruise ships are concerned (there is zero research on emissions from being a passenger on a container ship). As of 2006, the Queen Mary 2 ocean liner supposedly emits about 0.43kg CO2e per passenger-mile, compared to 0.257kg CO2e for a long-haul airplane. But emissions estimates vary so ridiculously widely that it is a little bit hard for me to take these figures seriously:

Emissions factors for individual journeys by cruise ships to or from New Zealand in 2007 ranged between 250 and 2200 g of CO2 per passenger-kilometre (g CO2 per p-km), with a weighted mean of 390 g CO2 per p-km.

That's literally an order of magnitude. I think there is some guessing going on here. To translate from p-km to p-mi, that's ~402–3545g CO2e/p-mile or a weighted mean of 628g CO2e/p-mi. I would speculate that a repositioning cruise (which spends no time in intermediary ports because it is specifically supposed to get somewhere efficiently) would be on the lower end of the spectrum. So, honestly, while worse than an airplane in terms of gaseous emissions, it's not... that much worse. From the way articles seem to talk about cruise emissions, I would have thought it would be at least an order of magnitude. (For reference, the difference between a train and a plane is about an order of magnitude.) Which I guess it can be based on the higher figures there, but I am pretty sure that that is derived from non-direct routings (port visits apparently contribute massively to emissions) or from luxury behaviors (i.e. having an enormous stateroom and other amenities that decrease space efficiency).

One may notice that those sources are almost 20 years old. There is more recent research on cruise ship emissions, but the non-academic stuff all seems to cite the Queen Mary 2 statistic (not sure where it even originated). I attempted to discern what cruise ship emissions looked like 20 years ago versus today, but was unable to find any specific information about passenger-mile emissions year-by-year. I don't have institutional access to most journals anymore, so feel free to share if you know anything.

There have definitely been new environmental regulations since 2007. In 2020, some new regulations limiting high-sulphur fuels went into effect. But sulfur dioxide is more of a health concern; it isn't a greenhouse gas. It's toxic to marine life too, and all other life, but wouldn't be considered in a passenger-mile CO2e emissions figure. Apparently the regulation has encouraged more ships to switch to less toxic liquefied natural gas (LNG) fuels rather than the literal bottom-of-the-barrel sludges they've traditionally burned (maybe a 20%-ish improvement at face value), but most ships have just installed scrubbers to continue using the same fuel and emit fewer horrible particulates. Apparently a switch to LNG, while favorable for human health, does not really reduce GHG emissions due to increased methane output.

Aakko-Saksa et al. 2023 seems to be the most comprehensive journal article I can access that covers current strategies in reducing greenhouse gas emissions for ship engines now and in the future. It mainly talks about fuels and technical stuff about engines I don't understand. This paper remarks that the switch to LNG could still be positive; it suggests a 30% reduction in GHG emissions compared to diesel fuel but a 6–23% reduction depending on how much "methane slip" happens; the IEA thinks it's 10% or less. That's still a meaningful reduction, though there is quite a lot of variance. The authors' takeaway is that there could be a significant benefit to switching to LNG and then blending that with greener fuels at increasing proportions over time.

There are many proposed ways to decarbonize the industry. It is not clear to me which of these have been adopted recently. The industry seems to have some interest in decarbonizing, or giving the appearance of having interest, as Norwegian claims to want to "reduce GHG intensity by 10% by 2026 and 25% by 2030, compared to a 2019 baseline with intensity measured on a per Capacity Day basis." And they are actually thinking about it: they have ESG staff and a 2022 ESG Report lays out a few relatively specific and achievable metrics (or so it seems to me, a layperson and a landlubber):

We were very excited to announce in early 2023 that two of our Norwegian Cruise Line newbuilds, expected to be delivered in 2027 and 2028, will be re-configured to accommodate the future use of green methanol. Green methanol is a fuel that we see as a promising future solution. Compared to conventional fuels, it can reduce carbon dioxide emissions by up to 95%, nitrogen oxide emissions by up to 80%, and all sulfur oxide and particulate matter emissions.

Environmental goals:

• Reduce GHG intensity by 10% by 2026 and by 25% by 2030, compared to 2019 baseline, and pursue net zero GHG emissions by 2050
• Decrease fleet-wide fuel consumption of boilers per day by 2% annually, compared to 2016
• 100% of fleet equipped with Waste Heat Recovery by 2027
• Increase the percentage of our fleet with shore power capabilities to 50% by 2024, 70% by 2025, and 100% by 2035
• Increase the percentage of treated wastewater compared to untreated sewage discharged by 2024, compared to 2019
• Reduce bunkering by 4%, as compared to 2019, by 2025
• Decrease the total volume of sludge offloaded fleetwide by 5%, compared to 2018, by 2023

Green methanol is apparently a real thing. The figures Norwegian uses are lifted directly from the Methanol Institute. It does seem like methanol production capacity is increasing and is on track to continue increasing, according to this source. If a cruise ship uses about 250 tons of fuel per hour (91250/year), and current green methanol production is just shy of 1 million tons/year, then if all of that production were directed toward cruise ships then it could fuel about... 11 ships. Hmm. If by 2027 production increases (generously) by an order of magnitude, that's still only about 100 ships, or less than 1/3 of the total fleet worldwide across all cruise firms. Better than nothing...?

Norwegian claims to be "on track" for all of these metrics, especially fuel consumption, but of course they will say that. I can't really figure out what their "-50%" and "-80%" figures mean and I suspect they mean nothing. Frankly most of these commitments are ridiculously insufficient, though it isn't reasonable to expect revolutionary changes to happen in just a couple years. I think we should take these commitments with a grain of salt, but it does make sense from an operational perspective why industry would be interested in improving their own efficiency, especially to avoid potentially crippling regulations from governments who they can clearly see are honing in on emissions.

From what I can tell, many or most of the emissions are not just from the transportation itself (i.e. the burning of fuel for the purpose of moving mass from point A to B) but rather from the hoteling aboard the ship (12x more emissions than land-based hoteling) and from other luxury-related activities. Intuitively, if we know how energy-efficient it is to transport goods by sea, this should come as no surprise: if we're comparing fuel costs, it simply takes less fuel to move objects by water than by air. This is why ferries have so few emissions per passenger-mile. Ship fuel is particularly nasty stuff as far as human health is concerned, but many resources appear to primarily emphasize the non-fuel waste produced by these enterprises. So the CO2e emissions of cruise ships would seem to originate not just from fuel but rather from the inefficiency of human habitation at sea. Norwegian is at least vaguely calculating multi-scope emissions (p. 15) with, for example, "purchased goods and services" apparently making up ~21% of total emissions in 2022 (fuel itself is about 55%, and "fuel and energy-related activities," whatever that means, being another 12%). I assume "capital goods" (18% of their emissions) are the emissions from the ships themselves, which is more of a decarbonization question for manufacturers.

There are also significant non-GHG environmental impacts due to operational procedures taken by cruise ships. Wikipedia has a whole page on the environmental effects of shipping (not just cruise ships, but they are included). Waste dumping, noise pollution, etc. Those externalities are different than the externalities produced by airplanes; same idea, but apples to oranges, so I don't know how to compare them.

Anyway, this is all to say: greenhouse gas emissions from cruise ships are pretty rough. Given the relative lack of information on repositioning cruises specifically, the age of much of the data, and newer emissions reductions which are maybe not yet reflected in the literature, I am going to speculate that such a trip has an approximately equal GHG impact as a long-haul flight, assuming a typical stateroom and a direct voyage. On average, it probably works out to somewhat more emissions, though I personally think ships have a clearer (easier/faster) path toward net-zero (ish) emissions than airplanes given the limitations of each mode.

I will go to sleep and decide tomorrow whether I will fly or sail home, but right now I am leaning toward the sea for this occasion. I am not sure about future voyages yet. We will see.

Don't really know the best way to describe this. But I bet people do know the feeling.

It's Sunday, all my chores are out of the way, and I have time to do anything, but instead I find myself not being able to decide what I want to do. I am turning on various games, looking at the title screen for a bit than turning them off again. I pick up my guitar, mess around for a few minutes then put it down again. I think about a creative project I could start, but then decide to not when I imagine how much effort it would take. Then I go back to scrolling various websites, not really interested in anything, cause it's all the same all the time. The weather is way too cold and ugly for me to go outside, so I just don't know what to do. The only nice thing is that I am listening to music in the mean time...

As part of a weekly series, these topics are a place for users to casually discuss the things they did — or didn't do — during their week. Did you accomplish any goals? Suffer a failure? Do nothing at all? Tell us about it!

Background: I don't like choosing outfits in the morning for work. Due to whatever combination of mental issues/oddities I have, in the past I've gotten stuck at point for a very long time. After reading about how someone like Steve Jobs or Mark Zuckerberg wears the same thing every day, I decided to try a version of that to reduce the number of decisions I had to make each morning. I didn't actually want to wear the same thing every day, because then I'd become "the guy who wears the same thing every day" at work. So I decided to have a number of predetermined outfits that I rotate through. I have some number of dress shirts of various colors/patterns and a matching number of pants of various colors to go with them. I have a few pairs of shoes in the typical colors that I just match with the pants. I've been doing this for years now, and it's great for simplifying my daily routine, but I occasionally wonder if people notice.

So my question is: How many outfits do you personally think is the right number such that no one would notice? Alternatively, what number do you think would be the best for whatever reason?

To be clear, this is just a fun discussion question. I'm not really looking for help or advice. I won't say how many outfits I have on rotation right now to avoid anchoring.

Hey folks

I'm building out a backup NAS to hold approximately 350TB of video. It's a business device. We already own the hardware which is a Gigabyte S451 with twin OS RAIDED SSD but 34 X 16TB SAS HDD disks. I used TrueNAS Scale and ZFS as the filesystem because... It seemed like a good idea. What I didn't realise is that with dedupe and LZO compression on, it would seriously hinder the IO. Anyway, long story short, we filled it as a slave target and it's slow as can be. It errors all the time. I upgraded to 48GB of RAM as ZFS is memory intensive but it's the IOPs which kill it. It's estimating 50 days for a scrub, it's nuts. The system is in RAID6 and all disks dedicated to this pool which is correct in so far as I need all disk available.

Now I know ZFS isn't the way for this device, any ideas here? I'm tempted to go pure Debian, XFS or EXT4 and soft raid. I'd rather it be simple and managed via a GUI for the rest of the team as they're all Windows admins as well as scared of CLI, but I suppose I can give them Webmin at a push.

I'm about ready to destroy over 300TB of copied data to rebuild this as it crashes too often to do anything with, and the Restic backup from the Master just falls over waiting for a response.

Ideas on a postcard (or Tildes reply)...?

UPDATE:

After taking this thread in to consideration, some of my own research and a ZFS calculator, here's what I'm planning - bear in mind this is for an Archive NAS:

36 Disks at 16TB:

9x16TB RAID-Z2
4 x VDEVs = Data Pool
Compression disabled, dedupe disabled.

Raw capacity would be 576TB, but after parity and slop space we're at 422TB usable. In theory, if we call it 70% usable, I'm actually going to cry at 337TB total.

At this moment, the NAS1 server is rocking 293TB of used space. Since I'm using Restic to do the backup of NAS1 to NAS2, I should see some savings, but I can already see that I will need to grow the shelf soon. I'll nuke NAS2, configure this and get the backup rolling ASAP.

My bigger concern now is that NAS1 is set up the same way as NAS2, but never had dedupe enabled. At some point we're going to hit a similar issue.

Thank you for all of your help and input.

Have you watched any movies recently you want to discuss? Any films you want to recommend or are hyped about? Feel free to discuss anything here.

Please just try to provide fair warning of spoilers if you can.

Inspiration came when I was listening to Busy Signal - One More Night, a half-cover of the Phil Collins original. Reggae and dancehall have a lot of examples like this but it's usually interpolating or covering the chorus rather than the entire song.

So, which do you know? If you could post links for both the cover and the original, that'd be ace. I'd say sampling in hip-hop usually doesn't qualify here, unless there's clear conceptual connection to the original song beyond just the beat.

Also, if anyone suggests the Chet Faker version of No Diggity, I will start a riot in here.

Looking ahead, the commodification and degradation of the Internet is continuing to take away digital resources that we have come to depend upon over the last 20 years. Whether it’s email or Amazon or YouTube, the decline of all our favorites has been well documented.

But we don’t want to live without these sites and services. Tildes itself is an attempt to preserve one such resource but in a better and more stable way. What other parts of the Internet deserve similar treatment?

Whether it’s open source eBay or community banking or nonprofit versions of Facebook… what would you choose and how would you go about preserving its character and making it workable in the long-term?

I'm hoping someone else has had this problem and has found a solution. I have turned on visibility of taps/clicks, and I've also turned up screen sensitivity. I've turned off all animations. I've restarted it. I've installed the most recent update. Nothing changed it. I can see it registering my taps with the visibility feature, but it won't do anything the first time I tap.

My phone is an Galaxy A52. I don't have a screen protector.

What's happening is a lot of times (more than half) I will click something, and it won't register. So I have to click again. Usually it's only twice, but sometimes it can be up around five times before it will register that I've clicked the screen. This also sometimes happens when I'm scrolling a webpage, so it's like scroll, scroll, try to scroll but it gets stuck, scroll, etc.

It happens pretty much everywhere, in every app, except the keyboard letters and numbers (thank god). But even the word suggestions sometimes need to be clicked more than once.

I'm SO sick of it. I've looked as much as possible to find a similar situation with a fix, and I can't find one. Does anyone know what else I can do?

Savannah Locke’s “Oh Holy Night” has a vocal quality that I’ve heard many times before in other songs and I was always curious what it was called, as well as the general EQ settings to reproduce it.

I name this song because I feel like it’s a very over the top example that I first heard over the holidays on a random playlist. I can only describe the vocals as “paper-like”. The style is folksy but it’s that particular sound of the vocals I’m interested in identifying.

Also, if there’s a particular nomenclature to these different types of styles or a glossary of some kind I’d appreciate it.

Full disclosure: I’ve sat behind a mixing board as an enthusiast but am no means educated beyond lows, mediums, highs.

Many thanks in advance!

Hi all,

I've been interested for a while in learning to play banjo. My first exposure to it was listening to bluegrass, but recently I have gotten very into Celtic and Irish music, and I think I would most enjoy learning to play by playing that style. Hence I am interested in Irish banjo, which I have come to understand is a bit different. I have a few questions that I was hoping someone here could answer. I don't play any other instruments and I'm interested in this just for fun.

• My understanding is that the typical Irish banjo player plays a tenor banjo with 4 strings. However I see some variation between 17 and 19 frets. Does anyone have some insight into the difference here, and which might be preferred?

• How hard would it be to learn other styles if I start with a 4 string? Is it like going from playing bass to guitar? Is 4 string typically seen as easier to pick up? I like Celtic music but not totally sure I want to be "locked in" to that. But then again, maybe that would help to be a bit more focused.

• To get specific, I am thinking of buying this as a beginner banjo. I'd be surprised if so, but does anyone here have experience with this brand, or else have other recommendations?

Like I said, I am a total beginner in that I've never played any instrument. So on that note, if you think I'm asking the wrong types of questions, I'd want to know that too!

This thread is posted weekly - please try to post all relevant US political content in here, such as news, updates, opinion articles, etc. Extremely significant events may warrant a separate topic, but almost all should be posted in here.

This is an inherently political thread; please try to avoid antagonistic arguments and bickering matches. Comment threads that devolve into unproductive arguments may be removed so that the overall topic is able to continue.

Choose one series
that you love
that you think deserves more love

Tell us what it is, and why.

Previous posts in the series

Additional Details

This was tempting to post in ~games but think it suits ~tech better.

What are your thoughts on these monitor frame sync technologies?
Have they made a big difference to your gaming experiences?
Could you do with out it?
What about G-Sync vs Freesync?

I'm looking for a French grammar checker. I think I'm in that intermediate-level plateau where I just need to keep talking / chatting in French but I want to eventually get to a point where I have correct grammar, maybe even some suggestions for idioms.

Some info for my use-case:

• I don't expect to go past 100 "consultations" a month.
• Would be nice if there was an extension that helps for email / Messenger / Telegram / WhatsApp.
• Would be nice if it did help with idioms.

I did my homework and found out that:

• Grammarly does offer this but only in English.
• Language Tool exists but it's 20 euros monthly or 60 euros per year, which are both steep prices for just trying it out.
• Asking ChatGPT works most of the time, but it's a bit annoying to load up that website every time and ask. I'm open to coding something based on the API if that would be the most cost-effective option.

Thanks in advance for all your suggestions!