Pika

I don’t push it. It’s their life and if privacy isn’t a value to them nothing I say is going to change that. I might mention the amount of data collected but that’s generally public knowledge anyway. Some people just don’t care if a company that they use has the data.

“I value my privacy more than you, there is nothing more to it” is a more than adequate statement.

Not that I disagree with the general mindset but, this isn’t a valid comparison because its unequal. It’s misinterpreting what those people are saying. There is a difference between giving your landlord a spare key and hanging that spare key on the community bulletin board.

What people really mean when they say “it’s already out there” is that people with the skillset or job to obtain the data have the ability to, not that the everyday person has the ability to. It’s not unknown the information is already out there, but that doesn’t mean that you would want to just publicly disclose the info.

I do this! I sort by recent and critical if they have the category. IDC about the people who loved the product, I want to see why people didn’t like the product.

I just look at reviews and history from sites I trust. I know that most third party sell companies like ebay are very buyer friendly, and if that fails my credit card has basic fraud features so worst case scenario I issue a chargeback.

Basically:

1. if the site has price history or a way to see recently sold item prices, enable it to get a general idea of what is considered a fair price
2. don’t buy off a seller with bad reviews or very little reviews (sorry to new sellers thats just how it is)
3. use a payment method that will have your back if you get scammed (i.e NOT any type of crypto currency, pay in cash services like money network or paypal family, checks, etc)
4. be proactive, keep track of the shipping info, don’t be afraid to reach out to the seller or in best case the websites support if something seems fishy

I bought an ice machine off Ebay a few months back, the seller had listed it in CAD, imagine my surprise when I got a chinese shipping agency tracking number and even more curious was that the package weighed less than 1 oz. I decided to wait just in case it was a mistake, I kept watching that tracking number, it kept bouncing back and forth between the same 4 locations for about 3 weeks before I reached out to Ebay and explained the situation. I never even bothered reaching out to the seller, Ebay immediatly refunded my money and within a day or two both the product and the seller page didn’t exist anymore.

From a company POV it’s probally meant to try and encourage you to let a friend know, but it seems that the page in this case might change upon login because it says to sign in to see your deals if you are an existing member. I don’t have it though so I can’t confirm that so I’m running off assumptions based off what the “eligibility” area says

maybe they updated it, for me it says first 12 months and then specifies “new customers only” under the “who’s eligible for this plan” section on the deal page. It also doesn’t give a link to login anymore and informs existing customers to sign in to see their own specialized deal

you arent the only one. I had suck a painful onboarding process with next cloud from the docker setup to the speed of it to the UI that I just gave up and decided to use a combination of immich and syncthing instead.

Yea that would make sense, if that endpoint is blocked then it wouldn’t be added.

I used observer and sorted by active users, so maybe fediverse observer doesn’t host the instance due to the NSFW? idk

Someone in another post showed a decent site that shows cloudflare dependency, so I threw the top 35 actives from observer into it. It’s honestly not as bad as I expected it would be, but it is concerning.

sh.itjust.works was down during it as well.

this entire thing has made me really rethink whether I want to swap to the new repo or not.

Why was there no communication about it. The gplay repo maintainer wasn’t informed of anything, no public notice to anyone was given, just a transfer of the repo and a status issue here explaining it.

Obviously the act is genuine as they were able to keep the original keys but like, this entire system seemed really sketchy.

I’m also not happy with the fact that it seems the first thing they added was removing checksums, but that might be a temp thing.

I also just noticed that it looks like they removed the entire public key for it, which if they had the original private keys using the existing public keys shouldn’t be an issue right?

One of my drives crippled itself a few days back, not sure what caused it. Wasn’t able to be resolved without a host restart which was unfortunate. SMART isn’t failing and has been working fine, so I’m chalking it down to a weird Proxmox bug or something.

For sure expected I was going to need to do a rollback on an entire drive after that restart though. Still may have to if it reoccurs.

I have Proxmox Backup Server backing up to an external drive nightly, and then about every 2 or 3 weeks also backup to a cold storage which I store offsite. (this is bad practice I know but I have enough redundancies in place of personal data that I’m ok with it).

For critical info like my personal data I have a sync-thing that is syncing to 3 devices, so for personal info I have roughly 4 copies(across different devices) + the PBS + potentially dated offsite.

despite recommendations, I run PBS along side the standard server barebone. I don’t store the backups on the same system they are stored to an external drive (which gets an offline copy every once and awhile) but I don’t like the idea of having PBS in a virtual environment, it’s just another layer that could go wrong in a restore process.

laugh and think they were weird.

This is the second year in a row that we had no trick or treaters again.

We have no kids really. We barely had any even before everything went down. I’m in a very rural town and there just isn’t the population or interest here anymore.

the implication of that is weird to me. I’m not saying that the horse is wrong, but thats such a non-standard solution. That’s implementing a CGNAT restriction without the benefits of CGNAT. They would need to only allow internal to external connections unless the connection was already established. How does standard communication still function if it was that way, I know that would break protocols like basic UDP, since that uses a fire and forget without internal prompting.

this might be my next project. I need uptime management for my services, my VPN likes to randomly kill itself.

I haven’t used a guide aside from the official getting started with syncthing page.

It should be similar to these steps though, I’ll use your desktop as the origin device.

1. install syncthing on all devices you want to be syncing with
2. on your desktop syncthing page, click “add remote device” and add the device ID of your phone(found on your phones syncthing app), you can also add any other device you want to have communications with (you will need to approve this action on the phone as well so be on the lookout for a notification)
3. make a backup of your current keepass file just in case these steps shouldn’t cause files to change but, since the end goal is syncing two devices that you have mentioned have differences with files with the same name better safe than sorry
4. create a keepass share on one of the devices (the folder path of this file should be wherever your keepass file is stored on your device. If this file is in a folder with a bunch of other files, you may want to move the file to it’s own subfolder or you will end up sharing all of the files in that path)
5. under file versioning chose what type of file version control you want. I prefer staggered since it when a remote device changes the file it moves the old file to a folder, and then deletes them according to the settings
6. at this point you should double check the name of your mobile devices keepass file name, if its the same as the name of the db on the desktop, you should rename it prior to continuing. Keepass should be able to detect a file conflict and rename it on it’s own but, better safe than sorry.
7. share the folder with the device you want to sync it(your phone in this case)
8. Your phone should get a notification that a device wants to share something with it. Approve it, be careful not to clear it because it’s a pain in the butt to get that notification back if you accidentally deny or swipe it away, the mobile app isn’t /amazing/ with it’s UI (but it has gotten better)
9. once approved configure it to where you wanted the file to be on your mobile device.
10. You should be done at this point. Syncthing should be automatically syncing the keepass files between the two

Some things you may want to keep into consideration. Syncthing only operates when there are two devices or more that are online. I would recommend if you are getting into self hosting a server, having the server be the middle man. If you end up going that route these steps stay more or less the same, it’s just instead of sharing with the phone, its sharing with the server, and then moving to the server syncthing page and sharing with the mobile. This makes it so both devices use the server instead of trying to connect to each other. Additionally, if you do go that route, I recommend setting your remote devices on the server’s syncthing instance to “auto approve” this makes it so when you share a folder to the server from one of your devices, it automatically approves and makes a share using the name of the folder shared in the syncthing’s data directory. (ex. if your folder was named documents and you shared it to the server, it would create a share named “documents” in where-ever you have it configured to store data). You would still need to login to the server instance in the case of sharing said files to /another/ device, but if your intent was to only create a backup of a folder to the server, then it removes a step.

Another benefit that using the server middleman approach is that if you ever have to change a device later on down the road, you are only having to add 1 remote device to the server instance, instead of having to add your new device onto every syncthing that needs access to that device.

Additionally, if you already have the built in structure but it isn’t seeming like it is working, some standard troubleshooting steps I’ve found helpful:

• if trying to share between devices, make sure that there is at least two devices that are connected as remote devices active in order to sync
• If above is true, make sure the folder ID’s are the same between both devices. that is how syncthing detects folders that should be sync’d
• If also true, make sure the devices are being seen as online in remote devices. If it isn’t showing as online, the connection is being blocked somewhere, verify you don’t have a firewall or router blocking it somewhere.