PupBiru @ PupBiru @kbin.social

Posts

0

Comments

343

Joined

2 yr. ago

it is matrix yes! and they’re contributing back to the upstream bridges

from their website:

Remember this XKCD comic? That’s why we built Beeper on the open source chat protocol Matrix. Unlike other chat networks, there is no lock-in. You’re free to use open source Matrix clients to connect to Beeper, or download your data and move to a different Matrix server and continue chatting with your friends on Beeper.

Beeper contributes back to the Matrix community. All of our Matrix bridges are open source on our Github. Don't want to pay for Beeper? Self-host your own instance for free.

worth noting that afaik elon deserves the blame here: he actively pushed for the account to be reinstated

i’m confused… are you talking about ext4, xfs, zfs…? because these are the filesystems linux people talk about and these are also the filesystems that run the worlds databases and data storage systems

not related to backup solution, but this is a great time to get some home monitoring sorted! put prometheus on it, run prometheus at home too, and have them monitor each other… great way to know why/when things aren’t working in general, but adds another level of confidence that your data are nice and safe

to be fair, they didn’t know either… she ignored the correspondance about the court case so it went ahead without her and she lost because an account linked to her identity did participate in breaking the law

this is working as expected

it’s not like they knew she was the victim of identity theft; she didn’t provide any defence or evidence… i’m not saying it’s fair either, but sometimes misunderstandings happen and it’s neither parties fault

i don’t think paypal did much wrong here: the 35k accounts wasn’t really their fault… their “breach” was credential stuffing: criminals trying usernames and passwords from other breaches… there’s not much they can do to fix that except enforce MFA (this is just 1 of many reasons it’s so important!)

if we stop sorting, it’s just another thing people can point to to say that the task is insurmountable… sorting helps to make a good recycling solution easier to implement in the future. i think of it like voting

that’s great news! let’s hope replication and peer review is smooth!

from what i read, it doesn’t seem like you’re able to push much current through it, which makes power cables an unlikely application in its current (heh) form

no i know many of the applications, its huge if true! i understand that, but almost everything like this comes with trade-offs, and i was wondering if there are any here that would make it non-viable for some/all applications

that’s true! amazon has a disproportionate impact on lower income people, but i’d consider the wider effect on society: google/facebook/etc controls access to information, which is more and more dangerous every year that they remain with that relatively unfettered control

amazon will remain similarly problematic, but that problem will likely be just as fixable while information access allows the FTC to act with a way to counter disinformation campaigns

anyone with a better understanding able to articulate potential trade-offs/complications to using this in practical applications?

edited:
more discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36864624

the critical field and critical current seem very low … This means you can't actually push big current through this thing (yet). You can't make a powerful magnet, and you can't make viable power lines

The method to produce this material as described in the related paper [1] is fairly simple and could be done at home with a $200 home metal melting furnace from amazon and the precursors (which also seem to be fairly standard easy to obtain metals)

Read this comment thread from SC researchers: reddit link removed
Lots of problems with the paper, they claim. It is not up to the standards of current SC research. One of them says Dias's work shows more merit than this.

still one of the biggest pieces though

that’s the catch though: it’s more cohesive because it’s not popular… people work and design and finesse it into a standard… linux however is popular so has a lot of opinions going into it! and that reinforces itself: it has a lot of stuff so that makes it popular and it’s popular so that means it has a lot of stuff!

BSD is great for what it’s great for and Linux is good for… pretty much everything

afaik it’s still very good for things like DNS and a lot of different server stuff. its more minimal than linux, so has a smaller attack surface and possibly slightly better performance?

i don’t think its particularly useful for generic uses though… if you know you need it, you know you need it. if you don’t need it, you’d be better off with an OS that performs all the things you want it to adequately

it did not; that’s correct! and i’m unable to list the conflicts that were prevented because of it, because, well, they were prevented

global stability doesn’t mean world peace

hey i never said it was “fair”, but the US does benefit significantly more from global stability than anywhere else… its not like they do it for selfless reasons

sooooo yes you’re not wrong, but i’d argue (as not an american mind you) that also it’s a little more complicated than just national defence

overseas military bases aren’t just for intimidating other countries into doing what the US wants: they also contribute significantly to global stability… having THE world super power kinda everywhere means it’s probably much less likely that some random country is going to start shit… sure, the US gets to pick and choose to benefit itself, but it certainly contributes

and that’s not just good for the world: AS the worlds leading superpower, the US benefits enormously from global stability: from cheap trade, financing, more global budget being spent on STEM/R&D (which because of trade and financing the US almost always capitalises on somehow!)

so what you ideally want is people to ONLY be able to access your backend service through caddy, so caddy should be the only one with ports publicly accessible, yes

caddy running in the same docker network as your services can talk to those services on their original ports; they don’t need to even be mapped to the host! in this case, you have 3 containers: caddy, service 1, service 2… caddy is the only one that needs to have ports forwarded and you can just forward caddy:443 and no need to worry! then caddy can talk directly to services:80 or services:443 (docker containers show up to other docker containers by their container name! so if you run eg: docker run … —name lemmy, then caddy in the same docker network would be able to connect to http://lemmy:80!)

.. but if you forward say service 1 and 2 on :8443 and :9443 (without firewall, and even with it makes me uncomfortable - that’s 1 step away from a subtle security problem), someone could be able to access yourserver:8443, right? so they don’t have to go through caddy to get to the backend service… for some services, that can be a big deal in ways that it’s difficult to understand, so it’s best to just not allow it if possible

an alternative is to make sure your services are firewalled so that nobody from the internet can hit them, but caddy still can… but i like this less, because it’s less explicit what’s happening so it’s easier to forget about

authority? none… but instance admins can defederate, and that has the potential to be powerful

this, however, has nothing to do with the original point:

where there is a can there is always a should or should not… the fediverse has plenty of should or should nots