th3raid0r

Don’t know why the other poster is giving you such grief there. It’s important to note that when you encrypt your root partition that you can’t view it from refind. It doesn’t have a mechanism to decrypt the contents it finds.

The way to address this is to ensure that you’re using a Unified Kernel Image. Essentially, a full image of your Linux boot image that lives on your EFI partition. Keep in mind it can’t get to your personal data until it decrypts your root disk, but at least you can get things booting.

So, you should take the time to switch to a UKI boot process.

I recommend disabling secure Boot and encryption first and Getting the UKI Boot working through refind. Then add secure boot using sbctl. Then re-encrypt your discs. Since secure boot is all set up at this point, you should be able to back your decryption with your systems TPM chip.

Here’s the page on unified kernel images.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Unified_kernel_image

I think this take is starting to be a bit outdated. There have been numerous films to use Blender. The “biggest” recent one is RRR - https://www.blender.org/user-stories/visual-effects-for-the-indian-blockbuster-rrr/

Man in the High Castle is also another notable “professional” example - https://www.blender.org/user-stories/visual-effects-for-the-man-in-the-high-castle/

It’s been slow, but Blender is starting to break into the larger industry. With bigger productions tending to come from non-U.S. producers.

There is something to be said about the tooling exclusivity in U.S. studios and backroom deals. But ultimately money talks and Autodesk only has so much money to secure those rights and studios only have so much money to spend on licensing.

I’ve been following blender since 2008 - what we have now is unimaginable in comparison to then. Real commercial viability has been reached (as a tool). What stands in the way now is a combination of entrenched interests and money. Intel shows how that’s a tenuous market position at best, and actively self destructive at worst.

Ultimately I think your claim that it’s not used by real studios is patently and proveably false. But I will concede that it’s still an uphill battle and moneyed interests are almost impossible to defeat. They typically need to defeat themselves first sorta like Intel did.

I mean, regional instances don’t have to stop folks from engaging primarily with interest based communities.

Some regions will dominate certain interests for example - here in Tucson we’re consider one of the Amateur Astronomy capitals of the world. If mander.xyz were to disappear tomorrow, Tucson would make a good home for all of the fediverse’s astronomy needs even though its a region based instance.

Further, there’s nothing that states an interest-based instance needs any registration. One could imagine a world where local instances have all the users and identities, and the interest based instances simply provide communities to the larger fediverse with no users of their own.

But yeah, it’s definitely a paradigm shift that makes interest based communities a bit more difficult to find.

Oh okay! I’m sorry about the misunderstanding.

???

I don’t particularly have any issues with them.

But if a user did, they don’t have much recourse. I’m talking about that as a structural aspect. Not a moral one.

But sure if you just want to claim this puts me in the !yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com community by ripping it out from any relevant context, go ahead I guess?

Hi there! Admin of Tucson.social here.

I think that the only way the fediverse can honestly handle this is through local/regional nodes not interest based global nodes.

Ideally this would manifest as some sort of non-profit entity that would work with municipalities to create community owned spaces that have paid moderation.

So then comes the problem of folks not agreeing with a local nodes moderation staff - but that’s also WHY it should be local. It’s much easier to petition and organize against someone who exists in your town than some guy across the globe who happens to own a large fediverse node.

This model just doesn’t work (IMO) if nodes can’t be accountable to a local community. If you don’t like how Mastodon, or lemmy.world are moderated you have zero recourse. For Tucson.social - citizens of Tucson can appeal to me directly, and because they are my fellow citizens I take them FAR more seriously.

Only then will people be trusting enough to allow for the key element to protecting against AI Slop. Human Indemnification Systems. Right now, if you wanted to ask the community of lemmy.world to provide proof they are human, you’d wind up with an exodus. There’s just no trust for something like that and it would be hard to acquire enough trust.

With a local node, that conversation is still difficult, but we can do things that just don’t scale with global nodes. Things like validating a person by meeting them to mark them as “indemnified” on a platform, or utilizing local political parties to validate if a given person is “real” or not using voter rolls.

But yeah, this is a bit rambly, but I’ll conclude that this is a problem that exists at the intersection between trust and scale and that I believe that local nodes are the only real solution that can handle both.