Tootfinder

Opt-in global Mastodon full text search. Join the index!

No exact results. Similar results found.
@tiotasram@kolektiva.social
2025-07-04 20:14:31

Long; central Massachusetts colonial history
Today on a whim I visited a site in Massachusetts marked as "Huguenot Fort Ruins" on OpenStreetMaps. I drove out with my 4-year-old through increasingly rural central Massachusetts forests & fields to end up on a narrow street near the top of a hill beside a small field. The neighboring houses had huge lawns, some with tractors.
Appropriately for this day and this moment in history, the history of the site turns out to be a microcosm of America. Across the field beyond a cross-shaped stone memorial stood an info board with a few diagrams and some text. The text of the main sign (including typos/misspellings) read:
"""
Town Is Formed
Early in the 1680's, interest began to generate to develop a town in the area west of Natick in the south central part of the Commonwealth that would be suitable for a settlement. A Mr. Hugh Campbell, a Scotch merchant of Boston petitioned the court for land for a colony. At about the same time, Joseph Dudley and William Stoughton also were desirous of obtaining land for a settlement. A claim was made for all lands west of the Blackstone River to the southern land of Massachusetts to a point northerly of the Springfield Road then running southwesterly until it joined the southern line of Massachusetts.
Associated with Dudley and Stoughton was Robert Thompson of London, England, Dr. Daniel Cox and John Blackwell, both of London and Thomas Freak of Hannington, Wiltshire, as proprietors. A stipulation in the acquisition of this land being that within four years thirty families and an orthodox minister settle in the area. An extension of this stipulation was granted at the end of the four years when no group large enough seemed to be willing to take up the opportunity.
In 1686, Robert Thompson met Gabriel Bernor and learned that he was seeking an area where his countrymen, who had fled their native France because of the Edict of Nantes, were desirous of a place to live. Their main concern was to settle in a place that would allow them freedom of worship. New Oxford, as it was the so-named, at that time included the larger part of Charlton, one-fourth of Auburn, one-fifth of Dudley and several square miles of the northeast portion of Southbridge as well as the easterly ares now known as Webster.
Joseph Dudley's assessment that the area was capable of a good settlement probably was based on the idea of the meadows already established along with the plains, ponds, brooks and rivers. Meadows were a necessity as they provided hay for animal feed and other uses by the settlers. The French River tributary books and streams provided a good source for fishing and hunting. There were open areas on the plains as customarily in November of each year, the Indians burnt over areas to keep them free of underwood and brush. It appeared then that this area was ready for settling.
The first seventy-five years of the settling of the Town of Oxford originally known as Manchaug, embraced three different cultures. The Indians were known to be here about 1656 when the Missionary, John Eliott and his partner Daniel Gookin visited in the praying towns. Thirty years later, in 1686, the Huguenots walked here from Boston under the guidance of their leader Isaac Bertrand DuTuffeau. The Huguenot's that arrived were not peasants, but were acknowledged to be the best Agriculturist, Wine Growers, Merchant's, and Manufacter's in France. There were 30 families consisting of 52 people. At the time of their first departure (10 years), due to Indian insurrection, there were 80 people in the group, and near their Meetinghouse/Church was a Cemetery that held 20 bodies. In 1699, 8 to 10 familie's made a second attempt to re-settle, failing after only four years, with the village being completely abandoned in 1704.
The English colonist made their way here in 1713 and established what has become a permanent settlement.
"""
All that was left of the fort was a crumbling stone wall that would have been the base of a higher wooden wall according to a picture of a model (I didn't think to get a shot of that myself). Only trees and brush remain where the multi-story main wooden building was.
This story has so many echoes in the present:
- The rich colonialists from Boston & London agree to settle the land, buying/taking land "rights" from the colonial British court that claimed jurisdiction without actually having control of the land. Whether the sponsors ever actually visited the land themselves I don't know. They surely profited somehow, whether from selling on the land rights later or collecting taxes/rent or whatever, by they needed poor laborers to actually do the work of developing the land (& driving out the original inhabitants, who had no say in the machinations of the Boston court).
- The land deal was on condition that there capital-holders who stood to profit would find settlers to actually do the work of colonizing. The British crown wanted more territory to be controlled in practice not just in theory, but they weren't going to be the ones to do the hard work.
- The capital-holders actually failed to find enough poor suckers to do their dirty work for 4 years, until the Huguenots, fleeing religious persecution in France, were desperate enough to accept their terms.
- Of course, the land was only so ripe for settlement because of careful tending over centuries by the natives who were eventually driven off, and whose land management practices are abandoned today. Given the mention of praying towns (& dates), this was after King Phillip's war, which resulted in at least some forced resettlement of native tribes around the area, but the descendants of those "Indians" mentioned in this sign are still around. For example, this is the site of one local band of Nipmuck, whose namesake lake is about 5 miles south of the fort site: #LandBack.

@wyri@toot-toot.wyrihaxim.us
2025-07-06 01:46:00

One is with dev-require while the other is without
#php #docker #oci

@aardrian@toot.cafe
2025-06-05 19:28:02

Even if the $180bn claim isn’t bullshit (I’m reasonably confident it’s bullshit), why aren't we acknowledging this makes Musk’s failure rate in government 91%?
bbc.com/news/articles/c5yg98rl

Doge claims to have saved $180bn, although that number has been disputed, and is well short of Musk's initial aim to cut spending by up to $2 trillion.
@Techmeme@techhub.social
2025-06-06 06:25:43

How spyware, posing as an app from a humanitarian organization, spread among Syrian army officers via Telegram, and fueled the collapse of the Assad regime (Mobile Hacker)
mobile-hacker.com/2025/06/05/a

@juandesant@astrodon.social
2025-06-06 21:22:40

Combined Public Service Announcement and Today I Learned: if you have `CLICOLOR=1` on macOS, if you do an `ls` of a directory which is inside iCloud Drive, evicted files (i.e., those that cannot be immediately used, but need to be downloaded first from iCloud) show with a grey background… see below:
First, both files are in iCloud, but not locally available. They have a dotted cloud icons in the iCloud Status field of the Finder window, and a greyed background in the output of the `ls` …

A Finder window showing a Folder named "CLICOLOR_Test" with two files: a PDF called "cssday.pdf", and a PNG file with a name that starts with "Screenshot-2025-" and ends with "17.08.34.png". The iCloud Status icon shows a cloud with a down arrow, indicando that it is not currently downloaded.
Screenshot of Terminal.app showing the command `ls -ln` run on the CLICOLOR_Test folder, and showing both files with a gray background in their filename.
Another screenshot of the CLICOLOR_Test folder, now with cssday.pdf showing a down-arrow circle (representing that the file will be kept downloaded), which means it is undoubtedly locally available.
Screenshot of Terminal.app showing the command `ls -ln` run on the CLICOLOR_Test folder, but this time the `cssday.pdf` file shows a white background, while the screenshot file still sports a gray background behind their filename.

Kristi Noem has repeatedly claimed that the U.S. government deported a cannibal that “ate other people”
and then, while on a flight from the U.S., became so “deranged” that he began to “eat himself.”
Noem first shared the dubious tale late last week during an interview with Fox News’s Jesse Watters.
The Cabinet secretary said that a U.S. marshal “off-handedly” told her about a cannibal on a “planeload of illegals.”
When Noem asked, “What do you mean he was a canniba…

@Dragofix@veganism.social
2025-06-05 02:09:26

That sinking feeling: Australia’s Limestone Coast is drying up theguardian.com/australia-news

@aral@mastodon.ar.al
2025-06-06 09:38:52

Please, tell me again how anarchism is chaos.
If this whole sorry episode of human history shows us one thing, it’s not that “we don’t need leaders” but that the very concept of “leaders” is incompatible with the future of our species. Advanced civilisation cannot survive under these primitive hierarchies that concentrate inordinate amounts of power in the hands of a relative handful of individuals. Look at the sorry state of these danger clowns.
Either we find ways to devolve po…

@davidaugust@mastodon.online
2025-07-05 21:38:05

Well worth reading this story of a dedicated guardian of the American People and the US Constitution, and the enemies within who forced them from their post.
lawfaremedia.org/article/goodb

The Trump people have just announced that they have sent a letter to Columbia’s accreditor, the Middle States Commission on Higher Education, accusing Columbia of being in violation of civil rights law.
My initial reaction is that this is good news since it implies both that Columbia hasn’t further caved-in yet and makes clear that the Trump people have run out of ammunition