I doubt it. I think some filesystems have mount options that disable the journal for that session.

You said that:

I am giving away a shitty 128GB SSD, which was used with LUKS 2 for most of it’s lifetime.

This leads me to assume that it is not now? Is this the case? If it still has LUK2 on it, you can run cryptsetup-erase on the luks2 container. This won’t wipe any unencrypted data, though.

One needs to be careful and avoid block level wipes wherever possible for SSD as this will wear it out quicker. Obviously, if you have sensitive data unencrypted, you may have to. Shred is your friend, here. It works on entire devices as well as individual files. The individual files option is preferable if you the sensitive data is at known locations.

In other news, the university behind this report has been implicated in corporate funded studies. Read more here.

A couple of important caveats:

Still, Johnson said face-to-face interaction can play an important role in helping coworkers build relationships, especially if they are just starting out in their careers.

“Remote works better after you know people,” she said. “So there is still a benefit of having some face time.”

So, it does rather beg the question, what should one do if someone is joining an existing team?

I can explain why the Israelis are murdering innocent children. Children are the future, without them the Palestinians have none. It’s as brutal as that.

In that case they would be locking down their subsidiary even further to just one client. I guess it all comes down to the plausibility of their argument for making this investment, rather than, say increasing dividends or ploughing that money back into other investments for the business. I guess they were able to justify the OpenAI investment along these lines. If I could hazard a guess, it would be something along the lines of:

This is a new market. We need to get in at the ground floor.

I suspect, OpenAI presented itself as a turn key solution to get a foothold in this brave new world and maybe steal a march on Google.

But Microsoft does. And those shareholders would want to know why money that could be going to them is frittered away on a startup that is constitutionally set up to leave money on the table.

Doesn’t that go against Microsoft’s fiduciary responsibilities to shareholders to maximize profits? At the very least, it would be contentious among the shareholders. Leaving money on the table? This is the kind of thing would need a very brave (or cavalier) CEO to risk a personal lawsuit.

The problem is it doesn’t solve the core issue. What’s to stop an AI data center buying up all the startup’s stock and future stock also.

Not so, if you look at their website, you’ll see at numerous time through the decades they actually decreased the risk of Armageddon. I fear your sentiment of complacency is precisely the danger they’re warning of. To pull a quote:

In an urban society, everything connects. Each person's needs are fed by the skills of many others. Our lives are woven together in a fabric. But the connections that make society strong also make it vulnerable.

Threads

It just takes one thread, whether it be food, water, environment, radiological or biological to snap, and down goes civilisation. As civilization becomes more complex, the threat surface also become exponentially larger.

Basically, each half of the peninsula wanted to absorb the other half under it’s legal, monetary and language and naming systems. Both halves wanted a reunification under their terms. Both halves believe they are the real Korea. To the south, the northern states a rebel states. To the north the southern states are capitalistic pig-dogs in hock to the USA.

New approaches from the south is looking to reconciliation and respecting the north’s self determination.

With that summary of my understanding of this article out the way, maybe a model for their relations is the devolved UK.

While I think a, devolved union is better for the world, it can’t be under a reactionary dictatorship. I fear this red line is too much for each side to come to agreement on.

Also known as “a cycle of violence”. Or " hurt people, hurt people" But at what stage is it someone’s responsibility to break this most vicious of cycles?