Not much. rsnapshot is based on rsync and hardlinks. So, you'll get some whole-file deduplication for unmodified files. No compression, no encryption/authentication, no way to verify if a backup is still ok.
Also, if you rename a file or folder, that hardlink-based dedup will not work, because it is based on files having the same path. Also, if you change just 1 bit in a huge file, it will add the whole new file because the dedup only works on whole files.
borg does variable size chunk based deduplication. if a big file changed just a bit, your backup repo will also just grow a bit when backing up that file.
also you get compression, encryption, authentication and the ability to check backups if they are ok still.
also, borg won't create a gazillion of files/hardlinks in the destination filesystem, but way fewer files (each about 500MiB big by default).
They've had open access to the internet until now and look where we've gotten. Having open access to the internet was not convincing enough Russians to condemn their government. So maybe getting people inconvenienced enough to show them the world condemns their actions is a better shot.
But government can't take off Telegram, for example. Despite they tried multiple times. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blocking_Telegram_in_Russia
And thanks to Telegram, people in Russia could find non-propaganda sources, even when Russia blocks them.
VPN helps too. A lot of people use it.
While Putin has money from oil and gas, he could sponsor war and destroy protests. Let's take away them, stop or reduce buying oil and gas. Regime becomes weak and Russian people could resist it.
The subjects are the ones in the best position to get rid of Putin. And in a way the subjects are responsible for their leader. Many are fine with the status quo and sitting comfortably at home while Ukrainians are in refugee camps.
The whole context here is that a man has invaded a country and is taking it over despite the very best efforts and extremely firm rejection of its citizens.
And yet your argument is that, in an adjacent territory he already controls, the citizens should somehow be more successful at removing him?
In what possible way??
Either he is not a dictator and the people of Ukraine shouldn't worry because they'll just be able to "get rid of him" anyway, or he is a dictator and blaming Russian civilians for being under his dictatorial control is victim-blaming.
We can choose what's best based for the task at hand. In the same way most people don't use the mouse to click an online keyboard, most people won't use voice control to type WASD in-game.
Dictation, for instance, is an easy-win for voice input. Clicking buttons can be more convenient with voice when we're talking to Smart TVs or, perhaps, if our hands have pizza grease all over them and we don't want to touch the keyboard.
You're limiting your thinking to the paradigm of visual interfaces paired with a mouse and keyboard. When all you have is a hammer...
Here's some examples where bandwidth and latency wins with speech:
1. "Play here comes the sun" vs. opening spotify, waiting, clicking the search box, typing here comes the sun, pressing enter, waiting, scanning the page and clicking the right song.
2. "Send email to John asking him if he would like to Play golf" vs. opening Gmail, waiting, clicking compose, start typing john, click the right email, tab to subject... etc.
There are cases where keyboard and mouse input is better... e.g. editing text, graphics production and editing, etc.. But certainly not in "almost all tasks" as you say. I think speech is the 3rd big computer interface that complements the mouse and keyboard and will make computers more productive and convenient for everyone regardless if you have a disability.
I too noticed that Dragon is trash (2.2/5 rating on the Chrome Webstore, yikes) I've been working on one that's purpose-built for the web. Most software today is moving towards the web, so that's where we narrowly focus. It works everywhere (including HN, Reddit, YouTube, Gmail... even Duolingo)
Sounds promising! I have noticed companies with environmental impact have disproportionately more success in crowd-funding. Many non-institutional investors (like myself) put their money in ideas that are good for the world - almost like charity. Perhaps you will consider raising funds and spreading the word using a crowd-funding site such as https://www.startengine.com/explore
I'll start it off: crowdfunding (eg startengine.com) so anyone can invest in startups instead of traditional VC to an exclusive group of investors "in the club".
That was my first thought too. I'd love to get into private equity (as a client), but the requirements are insane. I don't think it's just accreditation but also an even higher net worth of $5M or something like that.