I say this as someone who likes fediverse microblogging (Mastodon, MissKey, etc) it will never be Mastodon. Mastodon and its maintainers are staunchly against all the things that would make it a viable replacement to Twitter.

Why wouldn’t they?

Well almost nothing in this world is priced based solely on the cost of materials so I wouldn’t waste your time thinking in terms like that. And it is in fact the case that a $500 router is demonstrably better than a $100 router. A $300 UniFi router is pretty much the ground floor of decent router performance, and even then you’re severely lacking in warranty and support, and the software is subpar.

Beyond a certain point things that are more expensive are just more expensive because they are, not because they represent better quality.

This is true, but the “certain point” in this case is not $100. $500 is much closer to being that point, and even then that’s only if you’re thinking in the scope of a consumer router. Business class routers are thousands of dollars.

Why would it be wild to you that someone would use a technology the way it’s intended?

$500 is not an unreasonable price for a router if it’s actually good and comes with a good warranty.

Is he not the very same president who tried to ban it before?

deleted by creator

As a fellow management sim and automation game enjoyer, I understand your love for Rimworld and why Stardew does not scratch that itch. But the appeal of Stardew is I think just what you’ve figured out for yourself, it’s the anti-management, anti-automation game. The part of the brain that Stardew taps into is the one that likes to make things with your hands. It’s a bit more tangible feeling of involvement which is its own allure that is wholly distinct from the one where you watch a bunch of cogs turn in a machine.

I love playing Satisfactory and Factorio and Rimworld, and at work I spend a lot of time automating and analyzing and alerting. Stardew is the game I play when I’m burnt the hell out and I don’t want to diagnose why the automation I’ve written isn’t doing x thing or giving me Y result. I just buy seed, plant seed, water, and harvest. There’s very little planning and virtually no troubleshooting. You just put X effort in and get X benefit back. It’s why so many IT guys retire and become goat farmers.

Believing that either the Reddit exodus was negligible to that community, or that it was entirely decimated and left to Lenny are both inaccurate opinions. There was a very tangible effect on the selfhosted subreddit specifically when many left for Lemmy, and now both communities both feel like two halves of the same whole. Enough people moved over to lemmy that I truly don’t feel the need to open reddit hardly ever, but I do from time to time. I think lemmy also has a benefit that other fediverse sites like Mastodon don’t, in that Lemmy is not quite as allergic to the concept of discoverability, and the fact that Lemmy is inherently based around communities means that you don’t have to do the Mastodon thing where you spend the first month having to go out and follow a ton of individuals. You can just follow a couple communities and the content flows in.

I switched from SWAG to Caddy. Its config file is much simpler, with many best practice settings being default resulting in each sites being like 3 lines of code. Implementing something like mTLS requires one line per site, just super nice to configure, and you’re not left without a template config for more obscure services.

That being said, SWAG does more than enough and Nginx is a powerful software so you really aren’t missing out on anything but more streamlined config.

Traefik is kind of just like, a nightmare that tries to sell you on it being “self configuring” but it takes some work to get to that point and the “self configuring” requires the same amount of time in a text editor as manually configuring Caddy does. I can see Traefik being powerful if you’re using it with actually clustered k8s and distributed workloads. If that’s not your use case it’s kinda just more work than it’s worth.

StaRSS

For you trekkies out there

I’m sorry to burst your bubble but:

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/whodunit

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/whodunit

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/whodunit#:~:text=(hudʌnɪt ) also whodunnit,[informal]

The mystery in question specifically refers to a crime, usually a murder specifically and who committed it. Hence the “who” in “whodunit”. Thats why they don’t call it a “Whoisit” or “howdoeshe”

The punchline of your joke is that the answer is Oppenheimer, but it isn’t. Your joke just doesn’t make sense lol

It’s not a whodunit because the movie begins with you “knowing” whodunit, and then ends with the twist being actually “no one” dunit. Never at any point in the movie does the viewer wonder “whodunit”, which is literally the only requisite for a movie to be classified as a whodunit.

Two bonus points can be awarded for how bad it is as well. The first being that the answer to who the real villain is, is the only character in the movie who obviously presents from the start as the villain. The whole twist is “You thought the cartoonishly villainous person was an obvious red herring and that we have a much more clever villain in store, but nope. They just actually are the villain”. The second being that the ending monologue posits that Martha is not a killer because “She’s too good of a nurse”, when in reality she’s a horrible nurse with zero attention to detail and her horrible incompetence is the only reason she isn’t the killer.

I can’t think of any other whodunits where the twist is “Like a whodunit, but you aren’t even aware there is a mystery until after it’s solved, and the secret villain of the movie turned out to just be the person we introduced to you as the villain in the first act.”

Are they though? X-rays are emitted by electrons, not nuclei. They’re like, nuclear technology-adjacent. But if you had to pick just one moment in time, that moment is not x-ray technology

Either Rutherford or Fermi are who you’d probably credit for that given moment.

Oh well sure lol.

But if you want to isolate “The moment nuclear technology became known to man”, the splitting of the atom or the reactor that was built before the atom bomb are probably what you’re going to go with.

I’m not defending Tucker here but no it was not Marie Curie.

The splitting of the atom was only referenced in a single line in that movie and it wasn’t Oppenheimer who did it. Then Fermi’s first nuclear reactor was only briefly mentioned in one scene. Oppenheimer developed the nuclear bomb specifically.

I liked the second one, the first one I couldn’t stand. It was marketed as a whodunit but it just wasn’t.