It’s going to be a balance between your time getting an automated approach to work and the cost/effort of getting a monitor. Getting preseed working can be a bit fiddly, but it does mean you’ve learnt a new skill, getting a monitor sounds like it’ll be a pain, and you might only need it once.
Yes, that’ll work too, it does involve adding the disk to your machine temporarily though, so just be carefully which disk you format to do it. Please don’t ask why I say that, it brings back painful memories…
So you’re willingly admitting that you deliberately increased the chance of Trump winning by not voting tactically? I know it’s a rotten system, but you have to work with what’s in front of you. The approach you espouse makes it look like you’re actually a right wing saboteur rather than anything left wing.
While I agree with most people here that finding a keyboard and screen would be the easiest option, you do have a couple of other options:
Use a preseed file A preseed lets the installer run completely automatically, without user intervention. Get it to install a basic system with SSH and take it from there. You’ll want to test the install in a VM, where you can see what’s going on before letting it run on the real server. More information here: https://wiki.debian.org/DebianInstaller/Preseed
Boot from a live image with SSH Take a look at https://wiki.debian.org/LiveCD in particular ‘Debian Live’. It looks like ssh is included, but you’d want to check the service comes up on boot. You can then SSH to the machine and install to the harddrive that way. Again, test on a VM until you know you have the image working, and know how to run the install, then write it to a USB key and boot the tsrget server from that.
This all assumes the target server has USB or CD at the top of its boot order. If it doesn’t you’ll have to change that first, either with a keyboard and screen, or via a remote management interface sych as IPMI.
Oh I absolutely agree that making sure people actually vote is important, and it’s something a parties supporters can do. You can bet that Republican voters will be pushing each other, and Dems need to be just as dedicated. The thing is, that’s a whole lot easier when your candidate is saying and doing things you agree with, and not doing stuff you abhor. That’s the nit the party and candidate have control over and should be tuning. It wouldn’t be easy to make big changes, but even more moderate changes would be helpful. Biden seems to finally be changing his tune on Isreal a bit at the moment, the question is whether he’s irreconcilably alienated too many voters already, or if he can win them back.
Expecting people to vote for Biden despite disliking his policies because the alternative is worse is logical, but might, I fear, be excessivly idealistic. The more Biden and the Dems listen to their base the easier this will be.
I think you’re significantly misunderstanding whst they’ve said, or at least I get something entirely different from it.
The two of you seem to actually agree on almost everything, including that the Dems don’t have an overwhelming majority (I can’t see where they’ve said otherwise anyway). You seem to be saying that people should vote Dem regardless of what they’re doing, which they, and I agree with. They’re trying to point out that a) the Dems probably can’t win over solid Rep voters, and that trying to by making policies that would appeal to them risks alienating the Dem base, and more importantly swing voters and b) making policies that appeal to the Dem base and potential swing votes, despite the fact they might further alienate Rep voters is likely to result in a larger voter turnout for them.
A lot of the things Biden is currently doing seem to be aimed at trying to get Republican voters on-side, but are quite unpopular with the Dem base. Precisely because they don’t have a large majority losing any voters could be catastrophic.
The two parties, and their presidential candidates, are fairly evenly balanced in votes at the moment, both with a solidly entrenched core, a periphery of less commited voters, and the swing voters inbetween the sides. The candidate that wins is likely to be the one who loses fewest of their periphery voters and alienates the fewest swing voters. Making policie to try to ‘poach’ voters from the other party’s core is a lost cause, but might cause some of your potential voters to stay home even if they don’t vote Rep.
You two seem to be somewhat talking at cross purposes.
As far as I can see, what they’re saying is that the Dem candidate needs to apeal to Dem voters and those who could be persuaded to vote Dem, to ensure their vote. If Biden turns enough of them off and they don’t vote he risks losing. On the other hand dyed in the wool Republican voters probably can’t be turned, so there’s no point trying to apeal to them.
You seem to be saying that not voting for Biden, despite him being unpopular, risk letting Trump in. That is also true, and it is vital that Trump is stopped, they’re just pointing out that that is easier if Biden listens to his base, rather than population wide surveys.
Yup, I think that particular can can stay on the shelf. I appreciate the conversation.
Sorry, when you said ‘and everything above’ I thought you were referring to the things I’d listed above.
Reading it the other way, fair enough, you’re drawing the line for anonymous travel at private boats or planes. Personally I don’t think that’s helpful as they just end up chartering them from shell companies they own so their details aren’t attached to the flight so they can dodge scrutiny that way. You can try to investigate the companies but they’re anonymous that often all you can tell is they’re a charter firm a particular person uses a lot. That might be enough, but personally I’d rather either have proper accountability, or accept this isn’t the way to do it.
Home ownership is a good example of what I mean about making the rules apply to everyone, and it applies to all types of houses, from the smallest to rhe largest, the most efficient to the least. This is an equitable rule.
Applying the same logic to transportation would mean making all car and bike ownership records public too, which I don’t think it a great idea. As I mentioned before, if we want to make the loss of anonymity the penalty for owning a massively polluting vehicle we should apply it to all significantly polluting vehicles including planes, yachts, trucks and maybe even excessively large cars. The problem is where to draw the line.
As far as I can see, the current change just brings plane ownership in line with other vehicles, and so, even though I appreciate being able to track some of these people, without rules applying to other vehicle types, it seems fair to me.
Large cars too? We’re starting to get into rather dystopian territory here. I don’t drive a large car, but I know I wouldn’t like to be tracked just because someone decided I was.
I’m not actually averse to saying the loss of anonymity is the penalty for using particularly polluting modes of transport, but we should frame the rules in those terms, rather than just making ownership records public.
I hope I’m not whining. I am saying we should apply the same rules to, and ensure the same rights for, everybody though; not doing so is a large part of how we got here in the first place.
You or I can travel anonymously, or at least without our movements being tracked by the public. If we want to deny that to certain people, or to certain modes of transport, we should have a clear reason why and ensure that it’s effects are balanced with it’s benefits. As I mentioned in one of my comments above, if we want to hold people accountable when they use certain types of transport, that’s fine, and if removing their anonymity is the way we want to do it, that’s fine too, but we should apply it all the way down, from planes to cars.
Would you be ok with people tracking you in your car, or on public transport? At what level does that change for you? Is it just planes that should be publicly trackable, or boats too? What about limousines or jyst big cars?
Don’t get me wrong, I think people using any of those methods should be held accountable for the harm they’re causing, but that should apply all the way down too if that’s what we’re doing. Car drivers already pay tax on fuel and to register their vehicle so you could argue they’re already accountable, but I’m not sure that’s quite enough when you consider the harm tailpipe emissions do.
Nevermind the billionaires, they’re just being used as scapegoats to distract you. You don’t beat an unfair and unjust system by creating a new unfair and unjust system, so the rules need to apply to everyone, no matter how annoying that feels, otherwise, you may find yourself or someone you care about in the out group and suffering because of it.
If we want privacy, everyone gets the same right. If we want free speech, everyone gets free speech (that’s the one that I find hardest to reconcile. If we want people to be able to protest or raise issues freely does that alao mean we must grant the same to those who spew hate and seek to twist the minds of others? How do we balance that?).
I don’t know what the ‘perfect’ system looks like, or even if there is such a thing. What we have now isn’t it, but saying ‘that group over there should have less rights than me’ isn’t the way either.
So “privacy for me but not for thee”? Despite your feelings about the individuals involved (which are fair enough) you do see that’s exactly as bad as the “laws for thee but not for me” that we rail against? Balancing these rules is one of those thorny problems we have to address if we ever want things to get better for the majority, but just saying “you’re filthy rich so you don’t get privacy” isn’t the way. Neither is saying that they can hide completely.
A fair point, I hadn’t realized they’d stopped printing physical copies. They still seem to think of themselves as a newspaper though, and I suppose old conventions die hard.
That one is a newspaper headline though, its from The Independent.
Its shorter, so it fits better in headlines that need to be short.
If you don’t need external calling you don’t need a trunk, it’s just for connecting to the outside world. I found [[https://www.asterisk.org/|Asterisk]] was a good place to start. The config is rather involved though, so there are various front ends for it.
Putting a simple preseed file on a debian install image is probably going to be your best bet. Assuming you can run a VM on your current machine it shouldn’t be too difficult to test it until you’re happy with it.