I have been experimentally hosting it a bit and it seems like nice software. But I kinda lack a usecase for it… which is I guess common for 3D printing stuff 😅

Let me introduce you to this.

Yes, but afaik the temperature reading is also on the flash itself. On Samsung nvme drives you even get two different temperature readings to differentiate it if I recall correctly.

It’s not generally a bad idea, but you get very low grade heat if you want to keep the PV panels cool and in general you will quickly run into the issue what to do with all the heat on sunny days, while not having enough on cloudy days.

I know this sounds trivial, but you need very little solar thermal surface area to cover all your domestic hot water needs so with the above solution you will run into a too much heat problem rather quickly and convertig it into something else is not feasible due to the very low grade of it (40°C or so).

Maybe a solution for large public outdoor pools 🤷

I ran into similar issues before, but adding a passive cooler brought the temperatures down sufficiently.

However when researching the issue there were several people that claimed that ~70° C is actually the design temperature for these SSDs, which would explain why they usually don’t come with a cooler.

You could probably put Anubis in front of your reverse-proxy, but then you need something else in front of it that handles TLS certificates. So maybe something like this: HAProxy->Anubis->Nginx.

This is not a cultural failing that can be fixed by asking people to be nicer, which was roughly Scott Jenson’s prescription. Nor is it resolved by pointing to the protocol’s openness, which was roughly the community’s response. Neither prescription reaches the actual problem, because Mastodon’s governance tools sit at the instance level and the community’s experience happens at the federation level. Mastodon was built as open infrastructure at the federation level and community at the instance level. The Jenson thread demonstrates that the community has long since reversed this: they experience the federation as their community, and the instance as an administrative detail. The software has not caught up, and until it does, the community will keep enforcing its boundaries the only way the federation layer allows: person by person, reply by reply.

Thoughtful article overall, but I think what is describes is a design problem of Twitter like micro-blogging. There really is only a void to shout into, and I don’t really see how software can catch up to anything there. I also don’t really understand how this problem is specific to the Fediverse/Mastodon, with even the pre-Elon Twitter being famously toxic for very similar reasons.

Lemmy and other “community” based Fediverse software has much less of this problem, because there is a venue i.e a community to post into which has a theme, rules and moderators.

https://heyguys.cc/

Mostly irrelevant as submarines are mobile and not all three potential enemies pose the same threat at the same time.

This is the botPolicy.yaml that we use on slrpnk.net :

bots:
  - name: known-crawler
    action: CHALLENGE
    expression:
      # https://anubis.techaro.lol/docs/admin/configuration/expressions
      all:
        # Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/125.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
        - userAgent.contains("Macintosh; Intel Mac") && userAgent.contains("Chrome/125.0.0.0") # very old chrome?
        - missingHeader(headers, "Sec-Ch-Ua") # a valid chrome has this header
    challenge:
      difficulty: 6
      algorithm: slow

    # Assert behaviour that only genuine browsers display.
    # This ensures that Chrome or Firefox versions
  - name: realistic-browser-catchall
    expression:
      all:
        - '"User-Agent" in headers'
        - '( userAgent.contains("Firefox") ) || ( userAgent.contains("Chrome") ) || ( userAgent.contains("Safari") )'
        - '"Accept" in headers'
        - '"Sec-Fetch-Dest" in headers'
        - '"Sec-Fetch-Mode" in headers'
        - '"Sec-Fetch-Site" in headers'
        - '"Accept-Encoding" in headers'
        - '( headers["Accept-Encoding"].contains("zstd") || headers["Accept-Encoding"].contains("br") )'
        - '"Accept-Language" in headers'
    action: CHALLENGE
    challenge:
      difficulty: 2
      algorithm: fast

  - name: generic-browser
    user_agent_regex: (?i:mozilla|opera)
    action: CHALLENGE
    challenge:
      difficulty: 4
      algorithm: fast

status_codes:
  CHALLENGE: 202
  DENY: 406

dnsbl: false

#store:
#  backend: valkey
#  parameters:
#    url: redis://valkey-primary:6379/0

I think I just took it over from Codeberg.org back from when they still used Anubis. Nothing really relevant to Lemmy specifically and it is only in front of the frontends, not the s2s federation API.

It seems though like there are some crawlers that use 3rd party hosted alternative frontends to crawl (unintentionally?) through the federation API, so something in front of that would be useful I guess.

Not too many 8 port managed switches out there with an sfp+ 10gbe port for 50 bucks

Easy to get these days actually, with 10gbit sfp+ and 8x 2.5gbit, managed switches. About $60.

But my actual argument was that your 48 port switch eats electricity like crazy. That aint a cheap switch at all.

But you seem to only need a 8 port at most 🤯

Way too professional looking for this thread.

Also, you got a link to that sticker? Maybe I’ll add that as an ironic reminder to my “Kabelsalat” 😅

That 95% unused switch 😱

Such electricity waste. Much unclean.

The first point is a general issue unrelated to the number of adversiaries, and would also be the case if there was only one with similar capabilities.

The second part is the entire point of a nuclear deterrent. Strategic uncertainty with possible MAD is what you want. If the enemy falsely believes that they can have a limited nuclear exchange with tactical nuclear weapons only, they are much more likely to use their tactical nuclear weapons. And a nuclear deterrent is never going to deterr a conventional attack, that isn’t the point of it.

As a deterrent, why would it make a difference if there is one or three nations that need to be deterred? The entire idea is that if you have to use it you lost already.

Fire protection basically. There doesn’t seem to be a lack of space and the battery containers seem to be placed in a way that they can be left to burn out individually without destroying the rest.

Echt jetzt?

Da hat Scholz bestimmt auch so eine “Erinnerungslücke” wie bei Cum-Ex. /s