ramone

ramone wrote

Are your sites on two different servers? If so, you'll need to do some degree of sharing session data. The most protected way to do this is to give out a "loggedin" cookie (secure/http only) from your login server, make sure to put a timeout on it. The aggregator site will need to query your login server with the cookie data to check if you're logged in, you'll want to do this directly on the backend before any data is sent to the client. There are varying degrees of session highjacking protection you can implement, I'd look up a tutorial on single sign on/jwt/oauth2 to be the most up to date with modern standards (and lots of open source libraries to use), but basically you need the sessions from the sites to share data across backend databases. Other than that, just make sure the aggregator site forgets about old session data when you require it too.

If the sites are on the same server, you can easily access the session data from the login site to see if a user is authorized, or reauthorize them as necessary at each request to the aggregator site. Find out where php is storing your session data, then it's basically the same process as before, you just don't need to make an additional http(s) request to the login server from the aggregator server, but you'll still want to update the session only if the request to the aggregator comes from the same client as the login server (probably an IP address check).

0

ramone wrote

What is more honorable about ending a friendship face to face? As someone who has known many toxic and manipulative people, and considered some of them friends, I see no advantage to being "honorable" in this fashion. If someone you considered a friend is being a terrible person, what do you owe them? Not a damn thing IMO.

1

ramone wrote

It actually doesn't take that long to see nature turn against an ideology. Water levels are rising, visibly. The willfully blind have turned opinion against the fact that human "progress" isn't sustainable. This will be obvious to everyone within the next 10 years.

WTF is this place? No one has any ideas besides "oppression is bad, so let's be hateful to anyone who doesn't conform to our ideologies.”

The fact is: human population is capable of destroying nature, and they will because it is easier than living with the truth. Because people are selfish.

Not sure I care to hear anyone's opinions on climate here, because you are all too focused on issues that affect you in your lifetime. Future generations will have true disdain for people that focus on social issues, while the future is left out to dry, literally.

−1

ramone wrote

I have been transphobic before, it was only natural. I have spoken with trans people who have made their points well, and I don't discourage it any more. There are still people who I think are stupid who happen to be trans, but that's true of every denomination of people you can possibly think of.

−3

ramone wrote

People are peices of shit. A person can reason for themselves, and a collective will turn out it's own shitty reasoning for whatever benefits them. Better to make benefiting off of being a shitty person harder.

−1

ramone wrote

Nothing is perfect. You can't fix democracy. I don't see the last two as contradictory. Power comes from influence, if you have the same amount of influence as everybody else you are just as powerful.

You shouldn't have to make people understand your trans identity, just make a case for protection against violence. Words aren't violence, if you get shit on verbally it's probably because you haven't stated your case clearly enough. I judge individuals on their own merits, I don't lump every trans person together and dislike all of them, but I have met some trans people I dislike personally, that doesn't make me transphobic, but to their eyes it might.

The world is endangered, there have to be rules for how to extract it's resources, otherwise mother nature will exact vengeance on everyone and everything in it before it can reach harmony again.

I can only imagine any alternative you would espouse as having a pretty bleak outcome in the real world. No one gets hurt unless they hurt someone else? Ugh, I'm not religious but I can appreciate truth when I hear it, so here goes, 'an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind'.

−5

ramone wrote

Reply to comment by 1998822 in Just Read My Letter by MarxWasTheMessiah

They aren't the same thing. The least corruptible system is completely capable of being evil or not, it's a matter of the popular opinion. Not popular opinion about who gets to be a figure head, but actual issues that have to get dealt with, of which there are an overabundance. It should be very decentralized, and no individual should have more power than others. What other option is there if we don't want the world to fall into decay?

I simply don't agree that all forms of social organization are doomed, people just have to get over it when popular opinion is different from their own.

−3

ramone wrote

When I viewed this, the top comment said something along the lines that Warren is a technocrat, too bad she's just another dumbass politician with no technological expertise whatsoever.

−1

ramone wrote (edited )

Reply to comment by 1998822 in Just Read My Letter by MarxWasTheMessiah

Only it seems least corruptible of all governmental systems, especially if you start from scratch.

Edit: I don't really get what this forum is supposed to be about

−1

ramone wrote

There is a docker-compose.yml file in the repo, you should just use that.

Literal federation, as in hosting the database on ipfs or something, is something I would be interested in taking about if you want to shoot me a PM.

−3

ramone wrote

No thankyou. Direct democracy or bust! A novel ideology can form organically without having to adopt some theoretical bullshit that has never been tested in a vacuum.

−1

ramone wrote

I think this is a fair assessment, and I for one appreciate your honesty and realism. Too many people are far to willing to label themselves as ancap, ancom, anarcho-syndicalist, and so on. All I can say is "we live in a society" without a hint of irony. The solution from most libertarians is to spread out very thin and protect what is yours. All I want from government is an actual social contract, one that I have actually agreed to. Something that can punish greed effectively, and that is why I think government is a failure, for not responding to actions we can all see are wrong. If there must be an authoritarian oversight in society, I want to believe they can see what's wrong and have no fear to act against it. Capitalism and all of its folly is unavoidable when leaders are weak and slow to act, but that's what you get in a democracy, endless debate, while those who benefit from weak authority throw monkey wrenches into the gears of change. By this point in the history of the world, people should have gotten wise to all of the lobbying that ruins democracy, and put a stop to government that is designed to keep things stagnant, but sadly this is the world we have inherited and obstructionist government is the reality in some of the most affluent parts of the world.

All I can say is don't hold back from learning new technologies because of fear. All industry and especially tech could use more honest and realistic voices like yours.

−1

ramone wrote

That is clearly a hint at something, if your self conscious about what everyone is thinking of you, your confidence is low. Work on that, and you can attract women, no doubt.

I'm 29, I've only been in one serious relationship, and I've basically stopped giving a shit about not having someone, so I can empathize. It's hard to meet people and either want to be close to them and not want to come off as overly attached, or having a decent friendship going with little actual desire to persue a deeper relationship. My advice clearly wouldn't be good for much to help you find what your looking for, but I hope for the both of us that just being ourselves is enough. Love is a bitch anyways.

2