Many indexers have donations optional, or a points system today. The tradeoff is that invitations are now even rarer and harder to get.

Split versions is usually the first step. Many projects have done so before. Next year there will be some technical reason they can’t keep feature parity with the commercial repository, and it will drift from the OSS repository. Oops, we broke compatibility, sowwy guys. A couple of years later the OSS repository will be closed because it is a security risk. By that point the company and management would’ve drifted so far from the initial values of the project that people won’t notice. Those who cared will have jumped ship to alternatives sooner, those who noticed later will be already too deep into depending on the software that they will keep paying the subscription.

I have no evidence, but I also don’t have any doubts this is the plan.

It currently doesn’t work with Vaultwarden. The Linux client doesn’t accept custom certificates. And the Android client is paid. It is a dead-end for self-hosting.

The license is also stupidly a single sentence. Which means that use could be nuked at any minute, and any money you use to pay the developer means nothing. If they wanted to kill the project today and nuke the repo, you have no legal rights, the project dies and fuck you and your passwords. That doesn’t exactly inspires confidence.

I skim them all. The options I wrote are soft parodies of what each said. There’s a ton of problems with this model of governance, but I’m no voting member, so my opinion has no impact.

That said, it makes it so a single posture has to be voted on in its entirety, which is dumb (as some legislative bodies of the world have proven). As a result, nuance is erased alongside with any sense of ideological vision or compromise, and instead it promotes vagueness in every action and glacial institutions that break slowly break apart.

The very person who wrote the proposal that won reacted to winning with:

I regret the loss of contributors (which would have happened with either option winnign [sic]). It is just too early to take a final decision on the mater [sic]. Let’s revisit this in two years or so, and let this mess of a GR be a warning for our future selves.

The proposal was designed to win time without having to take any real stance while taking the smallest loss of contributors in the process. And thus it was written as the most milketoast nothing burger. When an infinite set of possibilities exists that actually do address real concerns like climate impact, social impacts, copyright and legal problems related to generated code, etc. in relation to the principles and overall values of the project. Instead, they are deferring the practicalities to pull request’s bickering.

But again, I’m not a voting member or contributor. So my opinion is null. I still think the way the process is designed and conducted is stupid and prone to cause the eventual failure of debian via governance collapse.

The Debian vote was so stupid:

Option A: Psychotic breakdown
Option B: Ethical impracticality
Option C: Political extremism
Option D: Two contradictory things at once
Option E: Something that doesn't prevent the other options but packaged with something nasty and unpalatable
Option F: Sensible but ultimately vague and action-less common place neutrality.
Option G: Nuclear option
Option H: Do nothing

It was such a brain dead exercise in futility. It was designed for the winner from the start.

Nussbaun’s comment on the result is hilariously dull:

On a very personal note, I regret that the winning option does not acknowledge all the legitimate concerns around AI: environmental impact, copyright and licensing uncertainty, the health of Free Software communities, and the strain of aggressive scraping on the open web.

The GR results give us raw numbers about our opinion, and a direction, but we have a lot of work ahead of us to act as a community and understand how we can continue to accommodate the very large minority that would have preferred to ban or discourage AI.

Lucas

¹ obligatory disclosure: the script used is AI-generated

Yeah, the option that doesn’t say anything won. Who knew?…wait yes, mathematicians, they knew. The most important part of a survey is choosing the options carefully.

Interestingly, social stigma is one of the somewhat associated factors. But not the way one would think of: high stigma equals high suicide rate. Instead social stigma skews statistical data available. Somewhat under or over reporting. Essentially the more stigma around suicide, and also mental health, the less reliable the data. It is similar to how social attitudes about sexual violence distort the reliability of statistics about rape.

This is just an example. They are usually toxic and combative if anyone even slightly disagrees with the echo chamber. The post I took the image from has half of their comments deleted by mods. I’ve had a couple of instances of harassment, spam and threats. Always users from .ml

But back to the point. Suicide is complex, and again, it has nothing to do with welfare state either. One of the most baffling things about suicide is that it’s rate of incidence is also independent of access to mental health care, suicide is almost independent from most of the typical socioeconomic factors we can think of. Look at Guyana and Uruguay. Exactly the same suicide rate. One is a country with development challenges, widespread poverty, troubled government, impoverished health care infrastructure and difficulty with access to mental health. The other is a wealthy country, with a long history of development, strong welfare state with great upward class mobility and mental health pioneers on the region. Both exact same suicide rate.

Sure it might be partially true (as per your link Taiwan’s rate is actually lower), the implication that thus North Korea is a good place to live on however doesn’t follow.

As a psychologist, suicide is one of the most complex mental health phenomena. Most often than not, it is completely detached from life quality or living satisfaction. It’s multi factor and it says nothing of what the meme implies.

Counterexamples exist. Rusia has a higher suicide rate than all of those countries, Cuba as well. And it doesnt get more capitalist than the UK and they also have a very low rate comparable to north Korea. Suicide has nothing to do with political ideology of the government in power.

Meanwhile, the second most popular post right now

Crazy Idea

Yeah, it’s going the be a whole ordeal. I will have to block an afternoon for the migration. Definitely not a “never breaks anymore” scenario. Everything can be broken, there’s no perfectly stable software.

Funny enough I had to rollback, since it doesn’t start in the latest version in my setup. I have to make a conscious effort to keep it one or two subversions behind. It is not the first time an upgrade breaks my install. It will probably be a whole thing when I decide to actually upgrade it again.

Right now, the latest update doesn’t run in my otherwise until now perfectly working environment. It’s frustrating because there’s no easy way to downgrade it in my setup.

After 22 hours and 291 comments, I can see that 80% is sunk cost, 15% never bothered to look at their Jellyfin client’s settings, and the rest use a device that doesn’t have a client for Jellyfin yet.

It is usually easier to rent a vps with a domain to run as a reverse proxy or a tunneling server between your server and users. Dynamic DNS and static IPs depend on the internet provider offering real outbound access and not a NAT. Plus any internet facing service should be hardened for security in some way, which it is usually provided in service packages for the vps.

Any security system based on expecting good behavior from people is sure to fail. If NPM has no estructural features to enforce safe behaviors, it is vulnerable by default. As no person using it will apply safe practices unless forced to. Specially if the default, easiest, less friction behavior, is inherently unsafe.

Truenas apps are just docker containers that were written by someone else anyways. You can always just turn them into a custom app and see it’s internal composition, o just make a custom app and choose the image and settings yourself exactly like in portainer.

Might be a jellyfin setting. I discovered that while the players report the device capabilities (with some caveats), some edge cases make the server still transcode video because it instructs certain formats to always transcode. There are too many variables and the server plays it safe. The biggest culprit is bitrate.

Yeah, I don’t think you understand Calibre at all, because you are somehow annoyed by it. I get it. But there’s no e-reader on the market that supports Calibre. Quite the contrary, there’s a titanic effort from the Calibre team (it’s been several people since 2009) to reverse engineer support with every single e-reader and tablet in the market that should not be minimized. You’re also painting a picture as if somehow Calibre is the Windows of e-book and everyone hates it but is forced to use it, when in reality that is not at all the case. Yes, it has quirks and people have constructive criticisms, but calling a guy’s name “rough” is not positive criticism. Overall, most people appreciate and like Calibre for what it has achieved and enabled for readers all around the world.

Again, it’s fine if you don’t like it, don’t understand it, and don’t want to understand it. But that doesn’t excuse insulting a person who actively is making your petty life a bit easier and free from corporate control. It takes a very weird person to feel like commenting negatively on someone’s name is somehow appropriate, it’s bully attitude. If that is all the criticism you can bring to a discussion of software, save it for yourself and stop replying. You’re all over this thread complaining, completely unprovoked like a little wuss. No one is forcing you to use Calibre, it just so happen that no one has done anything better, as you yourself admitted in another comment.

Good, so if you know what needs to be fixed it should be easy for you to make a new alternative, with modern web UX, self-hosting in mind and NO quirks whatsoever.

Really, it’s so easy to insult those who are making solutions when you have never contributed at all. There’s constructive criticisms, but calling people who are fronting free labor for your benefit as nerd aliens is not it.

Calibre is so old that it’s use case and architecture precedes the current popularity of self-hosting. It is as old as the premiere of the very first e-ink reader in 2006. It’s not obtuse or weird, it was just the way things were done 20 years ago. The problem is that adapting it to work as a self hosted app or even multi user sync requires rewritting all of its backend from scratch with fundamentally different principles and use cases in mind. And guess what? Everyone is way too lazy to face that massive undertaking. Thus the hobbled together solutions.

Fortunately, one way backup to a NAS works perfectly fine to keep libraries secure. It’s not this way out of caprice, and the Dev is definitely not an nerd alien.

There have been attempts to create modernized replacements for calibre. But they all fall through because, Calibre already does 99% of what they want to achieve. That one percent is covered by addons and shoddy workarounds? Yes. But that’s an effort to reward analysis any Dev is faced with. Calibre does much more than what the average user need, and they keep adding features. Because they’re not catering to one particular user but a community of a complex mix of users. Developing software is hard, rebuilding 20 years of features is daunting.