Extrapolate from the context. I’m tired of explaining obvious things to unreceptive people.

The discourse goes to the same fucking place every time Felix is mentioned. People don’t deserve the benefit of doubt.

I seriously doubt that anyone who asks that question doesn’t already have a foregone conclusion, but fine, I’ll indulge you.

Probably not. If he was, and had been hiding it his entire life, even in the era when he was the youtube star and had zero restraint, why would he slip up those few times, and especially such highly public ways?

He did and said some shit in his early 20s, and he deserved the criticism at the time, but those incidents weren’t repeated and weren’t part of a pattern. He wasn’t the paragon of virtue and maturity, but I’m willing to bet my left nut that neither are the people who are lining up to crucify him, and the only difference is that he had an audience. The people who aren’t willing to let go of their prejudices after a decade are equally as immature.

Do you want to continue posturing and fishing for confirmation from other edgy teenage minds, or do you want the answer?

I’m sure all the reactions will be nothing but respectful and factual, and not riddled with festering teenage emotions.

hosting their videos on their own website

I love that entrepreneurial attitude. If an online service is unsatisfactory, just develop your own software from the ground up and provision the infrastructure from your pocket. Car industry sucks? Just build your own car! GPU prices high? Grab a soldering iron and a handful of sand, how hard could it be?

Things are always more complex than they appear. The whole point of services like Youtube and Patreon is to offload that complexity onto the provider in exchange for a fee (or some other form of compensation) from the user. Just look at how many early Lemmy instances have gone offline because of the overwhelming financial or administrative burden. Hate the companies all you like, and by all means look for independent solutions, but don’t pretend they offer no value whatsoever.

What if you try reaching it through your public IP?

Stupid question, but is the service reachable at all? What if you map 81 to 81? Or whichever port the other, confirmed-to-work service uses? What if you map that other service to 8100?

It’s based on hole punching, but with extras. The clients punch a hole in their respective firewalls then the service connect the holes so the clients end up communicating directly with each other. They have a lengthy blog post about NAT traversal.

Tailscale. It does some UDP fuckery to bypass NAT and firewalls (most of the time) so you don’t even need to open any ports. You can run it on individual hosts to access them directly, and/or you can set it up on one device to advertise an entire subnet and have the client work like a split tunnel VPN. I don’t know about OpenWRT, but both pfSense and OpnSense have built-in Tailscale plugins.

People are freaking out about their plan to go public, but for the moment, it’s a reliable, high quality service even on the free tier.

I’ve also used Ngrok and Twingate to access my LAN from outside, but they simply use relay servers instead of Tailscale’s black magic fuckery.

Ansible is an abstraction layer over system utilities, shell, and other programs. You can specify what you want to happen, and it will figure out how to do it. For example, you can use the ansible.builtin.package module to specify which packages you want to be present, and Ansible will decide which specific package manager module should handle it and how.

Ansible tasks are also idempotent – they are concerned with the end state instead of the action. Many of the modules (like the package module above) take a state parameter with the possible values of present or absent (instead of the more common “install” and “remove” actions). If the system’s state satisfies the task’s expected end state (e.g. the package is already present), the task will be skipped – unlike a shell script, which would simply re-run the entire script every time.

Ansible also implements strict error checking. If a task fails, it won’t run any subsequent tasks on the host since the end states would be unpredictable.

How did you set up subnet advertisements on the router, and which subnets? Did you touch the ACL in the tailnet’s admin console?

On the home PC, did you accept advertised routes with the Tailscale client?

What happens when you ping a host on the LAN using tailscale ping ADDR? What happens when you try to tracert or tracepath to it?

Perhaps there was an easier lighter-weight way of doing this?

sshuttle does exactly that. It’s basically a VPN that uses SSH tunnelling. If you have a host in the same network as the target machine, and you can SSH into it, sshuttle can route all TCP traffic between you and the target (or a subnet) through the host without having to bind local ports manually.

sshuttle -r ssh_server <hosts/subnets...>

Minio is about to get Redis’d.

I use self-hosted services in the following categories as much as possible…

That question could really use a “not applicable” option. I don’t operate any home automation solutions, so any answer from me would be invalid, and neutral answers because the item is not relevant will appear the same as neutral answers because I use both self-hosted and externally hosted solutions (e.g. Mullvad for privacy and Tailscale to get around CGNAT).

No.

The local machine boots using PXE. Clonezilla itself is transferred from a TFTP server as a squashfs and loaded into memory. When that OS boots, it mounts a network share using CIFS that contains the image to be installed. All of the local SATA disks are named sda, sdb, etc. A script determines which SATA disk is the correct one (must be non-rotational, must be a specific size and type), deletes every SCSI device (which includes ATA devices too), then mounts only the chosen disk to make sure it’s named sda.

Clonezilla will not allow an image cloned from a device named sda to be written to a device with a different name – this is why I had to make sure that sda is always the correct SSD.

There was no need to physically disconnect anything. We didn’t actually use any SCSI devices, but Linux (and in turn, the Debian-based Clonezilla) uses the SCSI kernel driver for all ATA devices, so SATA SSDs also appeared as SCSI hosts and could be handled as such. If I had to manually unplug and reconnect hundreds of physical cables, I’d send my resignation directly to my boss’ printer.

I presume you have had to run on RAM, considering you removed all drives

Yes. Mass deployment using Clonezilla in an extremely heterogenous environment. I had to make sure the OS got installed on the correct SSD, and that it was always named sda, otherwise Clonezilla would shit itself. The solution is a hack held together by spit and my own stubbornness, but it works.