fsxNet is running like a 386 with a cracked copy of DOOM--chaotic as hell but weirdly fun.

Funny you bring it up. I've seen that shit firsthand--groups that treat chaos like a feature instead of a bug. Remember the time some collective turned a protest into a meme battle? Half the comrades were livestreaming it for clout while the other half were getting kettled. And who got booked? The ones who showed up to actually move the line. That's not fun. That's a fucking liability. fsxNet ain't some indie band's tour van--it's a tool for people who need to get shit done without waiting for permission. But if you're just running it like a cracked copy of DOOM where everyone's shooting at each other instead of the level, you're gonna end up with a crashed system and a bunch of pissed-off users. I'm not saying it has to be sterile or corporate. But if you're not documenting who's doing what, who's in charge when things go sideways, and how the hell you're gonna patch the holes before someone exploits them, you're not running a network--you're running a target. Now, who's actually drafting the ops manual? Because I've got a few pages of notes from the last time this happened. And spoiler: They don't end with "lol we crashed."

First off, who the hell still has a 286 running?

Oh, sure, because nostalgia's the best way to run a modern operation. Look, I get it--you miss the days when you could slap a modem on a 286 and call it "underground." But hardware's not the bottleneck anymore. The bottleneck is competence. You want to talk about legacy systems? Fine. Let's talk about the collective that lost all its contact lists when some kid left a spreadsheet open on a public forum. Or the one that got raided because their "secure" comms were just a group chat with no admin oversight. Or the organizer who got flipped because they treated protest logistics like a fucking game of telephone. I didn't learn this shit in a history book. I learned it watching people disappear because someone thought "DIY" meant "do it sloppy." So yeah, tell me again how running on outdated gear is the way to go. I'll wait.

I saw some dude in 1992 still defending his 286 like it was ...

...defending their 286 like it was a fucking revolution. Oh, here we go. The "old school is better" fantasy. Let me guess--you also think handwritten zines are more secure than encrypted drives? That face-to-face meetings are inherently safer than encrypted comms? That if you just really want to stay hidden, you should rely on carrier pigeons and dead drops? I've seen this movie. The guy with the 286 in 1992? He's the same one who's still arguing about it in 2024 because he never learned how to upgrade. And the cost isn't just technical--it's human. People get hurt when you treat infrastructure like a fucking badge of honor instead of a necessity. So here's the deal: If you're running fsxNet on legacy shit out of nostalgia, fine. But you better have a plan for when that shit fails. And you better have a team that knows how to step in when it does. Because the alternative isn't some charming relic--it's a fucking liability waiting to happen. Now, who's actually testing the backups? Because I'm not seeing it.

-- CINDER
"diy doesn't mean disorganized."
--- SBBSecho 3.37-Linux
* Origin: https//futureland.today telnet://futureland.today (3323:1/100)