Pika

yea a lot of my searches are technical in nature so I need to reword them in order to have the right critera show. Like looking for a linux virtual display will require 3 different types of searches depending on how its phrased, and will try to show queries about vGPU setups or KVM which are not related to that type of virtual driver (but it technically could be). and sometimes it needs to be narrowed down to specifically your setup as well which adds more searches to it. Specific error codes such as CRTC errors require multiple searches until you can find the right code, gaming wikis and questions can be similar especially if its about more secretive parts of it such as easter eggs or secret endings.

I have never heard of that before but, they have a really weird requirement for source release.

Source code will be made available to customers who have been paying for at least 12 months.

I don’t think I’ve heard of any software doing that before,

also I really don’t like how the “how do you know we don’t track queries” is basically referring to pay them to see the source code once you hit the 12 month req.

That being said I just tried the trial account on it, it is pretty cool. I like the anonymity feel to it, even if the UI isn’t super friendly.

is it really that much? I search a lot about my current desktop, and some about my proxmox server. I also like to search about ongoing tech trends like currently ive done a lot of research on the current ps5 jailbreak.

I just went and checked my current month usage at the moment and You are right though with the average. For this month so far I’m sitting at 2209 searches, my daily range is 28-308 queries (if I search “duckduckgo” as the keyword) the majority of them are in the 40-90 query range. A good chunk of them falls into gaming questions and linux questions.

for fun I just checked septembers, page total is 2627 queries and ranges between 40 and 167 pages a day with an average of 87.56 a day

august is 2445 with range of 29-189 and an average 78.87

the free tier is a static 100 not a monthly 100 isn’t it?

The pricing page says limited to 100 total searches and 100 AI interactions with standard models. I read that as once you hit your total 100 you need to get a sub.

The page isn’t super clear but older update logs state they moved from a “monthly 50” to a “one time 100”

Same tbf. 5$ for 300 searches is so limited. I just checked my DDG history for the month and I average between 2500 and 3500 searches a month. I don’t even use it professionally, its just general consumer use.

Honestly I likely would pay for it if it was 5$ for 3k-4k searches. I would just swap to another engine for the remainder but, 1$/1k searches up to 10$ which moves to unlimited would be more than fine, even if they decided to remove the bloat like lens, and translation from the package. but they are likely hoping more people are not like me and will just pay the 10$ a month to have unlimited rather than just not use the service at all.

Especially considering how many other services that I get way more value of are not much more than the unlimited plan… I can have internet browsing for 10$ which i already have for free, or I can pay a couple $'s more and get a streaming service or a news site which contains content that I don’t already have access to.

I like the mentality but, it’s just not worth it for me for a non-essential service that adds nothing of value to me outside one less site harvesting my data.

that project is off to a bad start in my opinion. This is their second attempt at this and they are still only asking 10k for a platform that’s going to compete with YouTube? Sure they funded 100k but… where’s the cash flow. Investors are not going to jump at a poisoner. Drive space cost money, and a poisoning system is also going to require gpu rendering ontop of whatever rendering is required for consumption.

Considering their primary revenue sources is intended to be user contribution via subscribers or their share of the content manager system… I really don’t see how they expect to maintain sustainable

I wish them the best of luck though.

You have correctly identified the core issue with open source.

Personally speaking, as inefficient as it is, I think that donations is the best way to support a self hosted open source project.

Followed by paying for licensing to be able to get support for the product.

If your project is open source any other restriction out there, you can’t really do because they can just fork and patch the software to remove the restriction.

Due to that restriction(or lack of), I’ve always personally seen open-source projects to be more of a hobbyist or personal project then a project that someone wants to do to make money.

zabbix with ntfy for short term alerts and a telegram bot for long-term alerts.

I was originally going to add that usually different services can use the same name as long as there’s no overlap, but you can’t even use that on this one because they’re both blogging platforms.

Yeah, unless they have authorization from the original project this is likely going to require a name change.

Said backdoor isn’t possible with the current day key exchange process. Without the servers in use private key, the most law agencies can do without acquiring the private key is force the CA to revoke a cert, which will disallow properly configured clients from accessing and transferring data with the server.

LE doesn’t have enough information to recreate the private key based off the public key, the only key distributed during the CSR process is the servers public key via a certificate signing request which is signed using your private key, which the CA then signs with it’s own intermediate key (which is signed by it’s root server certificate) and hands back to the private server.

The CA doesn’t have the ability to create that private key, and as such doesn’t have a way to decrypt traffic that is using that key. There is no concern for a backdoor in that process.

In order for the “backdoor” to exist, they would need to either copy the private key as part of the signing process (which it doesn’t), or somehow force the server admin to use a new private key (that the CA also holds) or somehow compromise the servers key generation process to allow for an escrow on the private key when it was generated which would allow the CA to be able to recreate the private key using the master & public key.

Now don’t take me wrong, you can still have a MiTM impersonation attack or a full impersonation bypass by the CA issuing a new certificate and having the DNS registrar have the web address go to a new server that is using the new key but, that’s not something the CA alone has the capability of doing, and any traffic that is issued to the original server still wouldn’t be compromised, its just clients visiting your site will end up at the other site and as such will end up using keys that the other side generated instead of your own keys and additionally said new keys would also be appearing in Certificate transparency logs, or modern day clients would refuse to use them.

I don’t think anyone’s going to solve the problem in general, to be honest.

Like, Let’s Encrypts goal is super novel, but also expensive as shit to actually run, and requires a lot of coordination because it needs to be a trust authority. If this ever happened, it would probably be at the backing of some government structure, because I don’t see many people wanting to jump at that as an expense.

Is this accurate? Like, I know what you’re meaning, but I’m pretty sure it’s not ICANN doing it, and more so your domain registrar handing it over to the US government.

I think the most control that ICANN has over it is they could theoretically, if they wanted to, delete an entire top level domain. Since they do control the DNS root, but that is the most that they control from what I understand.

I don’t know if they have the ability to delete or transfer control over an individual domain on legal request. I think that’s outside of what their actual system allows for.

To add some more information to this, you can see the context yourself. (so you don’t need to search like I did) they are referencing a post the Op made from five months ago. Admitting that’s how it worked

I tried to hyperlink it but Anubis gets in the way and throws a not found on the link for some reason, that or the original post was deleted

edit: I finally was able to get it to work. Post is here (not instance agnostic, still not 100% how to do that)

Simply speaking. No

Lets be real, while many do care, it isn’t going to be a “I need to leave the platform” level care.

Furthermore, the people impacted by it, may also not actually be in the majority either. For example they are doing similar to how discord is doing their age verification, where they are using existing metrics to infer your age without hard requiring it. Reddit has stated that said metrics include account age, email provider and topics you navigate.

Unless they have a super heavy handed way of doing this, I doubt anything super meaningful like another mass exodus like how the API issue was will happen.

That is an interesting concept, I would argue that it wouldn’t tackle the root cause of why most would want to federate due to rules just being universally applied to both the user instance and the community instance for the mega instances, and it still wouldn’t do anything with it being against the spirit of the fediverse in terms of needing to spread or web out, but I agree it would be nice.

I tend to agree that the majority of communities are hosted on 3 major instance’s its a concern that makes it difficult remove any of the 3 or 4 mega instances regardless of policies or practices.

I see many saying just boycott or block .world but, a decent source of communities im in are listed there. I know it’s against the spirit of fediverse but I don’t see that changing any time soon.

I use proxmox on one server, but currently my layout is:

• docker 1:
  • Authentik first network
  • heimdall
  • immich
  • jellyfin
  • NPM first network
  • zipline
• docker 2:
  • authentik second network
  • npm second network
  • blorp
  • gitlab-runner
  • ladder
  • metube
  • photon
  • privatebin
  • tandoor
  • bar assistant
  • sponsor block

LXCS:

• database server
• pihole
• wireguard
• mail server (postfix/dovecot)
• zoneminder
• zabbix
• gitlab
• matrix
• xmpp/openfire
• revolt/stoat
• gamevox (temporary)
• pufferpanel - minecraft
• pufferpanel - ark
• palworld
• discord development container
• projects container

VMs:

• homeassistant
• ipa server
• firewall
• Syncthing / immich storage / PXE server/ File storage

Also thank you for making this post, it helped me realize I have a few containers and services I don’t use and I don’t think have activity on them anymore so I can start a deprecation cycle on them lol

I use proxmox on one server, but currently my layout is:

• docker 1:
  • Authentik first network
  • heimdall
  • immich
  • jellyfin
  • NPM first network
  • zipline
• docker 2:
  • authentik second network
  • npm second network
  • blorp
  • gitlab-runner
  • ladder
  • metube
  • photon
  • privatebin
  • tandoor
  • bar assistant
  • sponsor block

LXCS:

• pihole
• wireguard
• mail server (postfix/dovecot)
• zoneminder
• zabbix
• gitlab
• matrix
• xmpp/openfire
• revolt/stoat
• gamevox (temporary)
• pufferpanel - minecraft
• pufferpanel - ark
• palworld
• discord development container
• projects container VMs:
• homeassistant
• ipa server
• firewall
• Syncthing / immich storage / PXE server/ File storage

Also thank you for making this post, it helped me realize I have a few containers and services I don’t use and I don’t think have activity on them anymore so I can start a deprecation cycle on them lol

As someone who ran Ubuntu server for a few years before moving to Debian. I would recommend Debian over Ubuntu just because I have had to do less maintenance with it. When I was on Ubuntu updating it was a constant concern of “will something change that is bad” for example they pushed the kernel live patch and the Ubuntu subscription banner as an update instead of an upgrade, so I updated as normal, and there it was.

I dislike OS’s that install new packages as part of their update procedures (an update that installs a new package instead of replacing an existing one should be reserved for upgrades), and Debian has never done that with me, so Debian is where I stay.

I noticed this myself by complete coincidence when itjust.works updated and I could click on my own comments and they wouldn’t pull anything.

I had thought that it might have been a bug with the server so I switched over to the standard Lemmy instance and it would load fine.

Then I dug through the settings more and I found the toxic mode hidden in the advanced settings. and realized that when I enabled toxic mode I could see the comment tree.

Weirdly enough, I did a deep dive into all the black lists that it has hard-coded when I saw and I couldn’t for the life of me find out what was flagging that post from being able to be seen. None of the instances of anyone in the comment train were in the black list, I guess it’s possible that the instance itself was in a blacklist, but I forgot to check that.