emax_gomax @ emax_gomax @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

384

Joined

2 yr. ago

I used to, but then I got so many subs it wasn't really practical anymore. Now I just let the algorithm recommend new vids. Just too much great content creators, what can you do.

Ooh, we never saw the green goblin but looks like Harry might get the venom symbiote after pete disassociate from it.

Docker is a container framework. Basically a recipe for a piece of software or a service. All you have to do is download a docker container image (there's numerous one pre prepared for stuff like qbittorrent or sonarr or jellyfin) and you need to mount (basically reference) your media or configuration directories into the container. By default each container is basically it's own self contained os (like a vm, but much more efficient). This prevents services from stepping over each other and aids composability because if you're interested in something new like bazarr literally all you have to do is pull an image and configure it. There's also something called docker-compose which let's you put all that configuration for your services into a readable yaml file and then you can just move it from machine to machine to setup or transition.

Note. You can use docker on windows but it's much more efficient on actual Linux. Windows just runs a pseudo Linux VM for docker support. The real thing is always better.

You should use jellyfin in docker and mount your media files without write permissions. It's exactly what I do partially for this but more to ease maintenance and reproducing my server.

I thought unverified content was removed because of rampant unchecked abuse. Ah, maybe it was that that spurned the companies to make pornhub remove it.

All the jokes aside, it's still amazing the CEO over a year in doesn't even know how profitable being an user that drives engagement on the site is compared to a (I guess) competitor like youtube. He's just like we're as profitable as youtube for you, or if not we can be, like the guy knows nothing and is just throwing claims out there with no basis in reality or plan to follow through on them.

Again, I use Firefox, for the most part because of the reasons you've described. But none of what you've said is really an argument for security or privacy against the browser. If you just wanna say Google = evil, so don't trust anything they make, that's fine. The chromium forks aren't google owned and they don't need respect what google tries to do. Case in point manifest v3 came and brave still has native ad blockers and intend to support both manifest 2 and 3 going forward. It's really just a matter of who has the bandwidth and funding to maintain a browser of the scale of chromium or Firefox. Google clearly does, mozilla does a decent job despite the iffy funding situation actively restricting donations purely for the browser. If its just small privacy enhancing tweaks atop chromium smaller vendors like brave can do that. End of the day chromium is a well optimised, standardised and frankly well written browser that is perfectly fine for anyone that wants to use it. Should Google be the entity in charge of chromium given their clear conflict of interest, obviously not. But no one else has stepped upto the plate and mozilla is clearly the inferior in regards to features or browser optimisations (just due to scale of support available). Don't get me wrong, Firefox is great and everyone should use it for their own sakes, but this just blind fear mongering of anything chromium related isn't productive.

Unsecure how exactly? Being chromium makes the browser more standard. It blends in with other browsers easier which means it can add protections while still showing itself as chromium compatible. I'd like to learn more about how chromium can just kill forks by updating the license, last I heard it was a BSD compatible one and I wasn't aware of it retroactively restricting access. Of course google can just fork and deprecate chromium with a more restrictive license given their the key copyright holders but as their project that isn't surprising. Firefox isn't interested in harvesting your data but that isn't security, it's privacy. Most chromium forks are the same. Brave doesn't harvest your data. It did once (and it can be argued you should avoid it just for that) but you seem to care less about which browser is best for your online privacy and more for just shilling firefox. For reference I use and love librewolf, but I like to consider myself open minded enough to try the other options... such as they are.