Omw, a replacement for Vikunja and Joplin? Sign me up!

ACF-50 is what you really want. Don’t get me wrong, I’m conditioned to loving the smell of petrol, but ACF-50? No comparison

The girl in the left is what I mean when I say I prefer girls without makeup.

Start with Pi-Hole. Use Linux (I started with Debian) to install Docker/Docker compose, Use Docker to install Portainer, and Portainer to install Pi-Hole, and literally everything else. Run it on any e-waste you have. There’s a thousand guides, it’s easy (comparatively), immediately useful and you’ll learn right quick about redundancy when you break it. Oh you’ll learn so much when you break your only instance of Pi-Hole. Watchtower messes up the updates while you’re at work and SO wants to use Facebook… You’ll learn. Also, don’t do automatic updates for a long time.

You should also learn how to read documentation and Docker’s is stellar, it’ll help you when you’re trying to implement some solo project with minimal documentation… You might hear RTFM which translates to “have you read the documentation?”.

Chatgpt is a fine rubber duck as long as you’re doing standard things on standard platforms. Explain your problem to ChatGPT as best you can and troubleshoot with it. Everything should be a place holder, give it zero details you don’t have to. Then follow the stupid steps it gives you. If it asks you if you made sure the port is what you told it you expect the port to be, go fucking check. It’s a robot, it doesn’t care how good you are just do the thing. If none of that works come here with all the checks you’ve already done so someone here doesn’t ask you if you made sure the port was 8096 in the compose file and you typed it as “8906:8096”. You will mess up simple stuff, it’s fine we all do/did, LLMs are great at covering the basics.

You’ll want to use Podman, Dockge, LXCs, what have you eventually. But Docker/Portainer are the standards. Everyone that can use Podman/Dockge/… can use Docker/Portainer, not the other way around. You’ll get more help doing standard things on standard platforms.

You learn what Docker is, how it works, what a compose file is, how they work, what maintenance is like. Then branch from there, after Pi-Hole what’s the most impactful to you, media? Jellyfin, plex & *arrs+gluetun, what’s your poison? All available through docker. Keep adding services until you cant stand the upkeep, you expand beyond your hardware, or you know you have all you want.

Docker is least effort to learn to do this stuff, you may want to out grow it eventually, but I don’t think you’ll ever not use docker/podman for something. Even when you have everything set up as a NixOS box, there’s likely gonna be a docker/podman host running something somewhere, probably a third redundant pihole.

Then tinker with what you have. Docker is good but has limitations, what is Proxmox, what’s an LXC? In summer I wish everything was on Docker so updates are painless (comparatively). In winter I’m glad I’m in proxmox and can tinker away.

My entire homelab used to live on a rPi4 running Debian, and docker doing almost everything on your list. My current pair of n100 minis can do everything on your list. I think (I’ve not tried game servers).

It doesn’t take much. Start with Debian, Docker, Portainer, Pi-Hole.

When something catastrophically breaks, it’s generally not worth chasing the solution. Good teaching moments later but by then you’ll have snapshots to revert back to. Anyway when things break catastrophically, and they will, give yourself an hour to fix it, and then just start again. It reinforces install procedures, you’ll have an idea on how you could have done it better anyways, and it’s just not worth the heart ache.

Not a downside at all in my opinion. There’s a framework and consequences for infractions. (Not really, but in theory)

I love innuendo as humour. I learned not to use it for everyone, everywhere, all the time precisely because I would have been sacked. I’m naturally quite flirty as a person, which I also learned to temper by not getting sacked. I was forced to learn how to ask about that thing you talked about last week. Which forced me to pay attention to what you say this week, so I can ask next week.

So to the dance group: I had already learned what is/n’t appropriate for work, which is close enough for acquaintances. Conversation happens, a bit of personality creeps (intended) out, they back away (I’ve learned to recognise when someone shuts down a conversation at work) I apologise, life goes on me a little the wiser. Or, a bit of personality creeps out, my partner lowers the tone too, life is fun. Usually, when I feel I’ve known someone enough, I’ll let them know I have gutter humour and will flirt with anyone, apologise in advance, let them know I don’t mean anything by it, and that I’m doing my best. I started this because those like me identify and we get to the good times sooner, those not like me don’t identify and I’m more aware around them.

I do wonder how many guys are unaware of how creepy some things might be because of their own experiences.

Too many, and I’m sure I’m guilty of running right up against that line more often than I’m aware. Then again, I’ll flirt with anyone that flirts with me (and I mean anyone), but I’m not looking to hookup at all, engaged and all that.

When you are accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression. -Franklin Leonard

Go places that people want to go, do things that people want to do. Live an interesting life and people will find you interesting.

For me it was Motorcycles. I had one, I knew cool roads, nice views, interesting villages and I was constantly out at get togethers.

I met my fiancée at a BBQ hosted by a motorcycle gear shop. She was interested in cool roads, nice views, interesting towns and so interested in me. Motorcycling (like body building) generally doesn’t attract women, it attracts men, don’t motorcycle for girls.

Before that. I attended dance class. I met a bunch of people, there’s music, exercise, skill expression, creativity, physical contact (I danced Lindy Hop) natural endorphine producers.

I didn’t creep, I was polite, I expressed positivity (If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything. No-one knew the songs I hated, but they knew the ones i liked. People would seek me out for those songs because they knew it was gonna be A DANCE, etc) and semi groomed (clean, not stylish). I did the lesson as best I could, there were always more “leads” than “follows” so I was always in demand for the free dance time at the end. I asked them how they were, and (I cannot stress enough: WITHOUT CREEPING) about their lives. It’s not an interview, it’s a conversation, not everyone is a potential date. I was primarily there to learn to dance Lindy Hop and Charleston, meeting very pretty, in shape girls was a massive side benefit. Talking to them just kinda happens, you’re together for a few minutes dancing away, might as well ask her name.

If conversation is hard, it is for me, practice at work. Force yourself to learn about people’s lives, learn how to make it natural, learn how to recognise your hitting a boundary before crossing it. Work is great, people are forced to talk to you and you’ll find extroverts (easy mode) and introverts (hard mode) there. When you have introverts telling you what they’re up to, you know you can make people feel valued through conversation.

The truth is don’t do anything for girls, any girl, that isn’t a collection of red flags, can sense the insincerity. Do a thing you want to do, and go places where a girl that is interested in that thing might go.

Meaning they shouldn’t be ruled over. That’s all I mean.

But that is what most people mean when they say “we all are/should be equal”, they don’t mean “we can all run the same speed”. Did you think they meant “we can all run the same speed”?

This doesn’t mean person A is better overall as a human being than person B

If a person is no better or worse than another [as a human being], what are they if not equal? Sure they’re [Superior in their key talents, abilities, self control, skill, thinking, etc.] but “overall” they’re equal.

You don’t need metrics because you can experience the quality differences

What is the “quality difference” you’re experiencing?

This doesn’t mean person A is better overall as a human being than person B

If a person is no better or worse than another, what are they if not equal? Sure they’re [Superior in their key talents, abilities, self control, skill, thinking, etc.] but “overall” they’re equal.

As an aside, how do you know they’re superior without the metrics you deny exist? Not really an important question. Focus on the first contradiction. The contradiction between: “people aren’t equal, but overall people are equal” I think gets to the core of your position.

This doesn’t mean person A is better overall as a human being than person B

If a person is no better or worse than another, what are they if not equal?

This doesn’t mean person A is better overall as a human being than person B

If a person is no better or worse than another, what are they if not equal? Sure they’re faster but “overall” they’re equal.

Five hundred pennies, and five singles are different, but they are equal. Just because a thing is different from another thing, doesn’t mean it isn’t equal. Sure, five hundred pennies are heavier, they’re still equal.

Perhaps “equitable” is a better word for the concept people are talking about. But “equal” is the word used, so it means this now. Regardless, the specific word isn’t worth arguing about, it’s the concept that is worth discussing.

I think the problem with deciding people aren’t equal, is that some group has to decide what metrics are most important. That group will inevitably be the one with the most power, and they’ll inevitably pick metrics that they themselves excell at. Then the metric becomes a target, and every metric that becomes a target becomes malicious.

We already see this, we as a society, value people by the amount of capital they own. Wealthy people get to enjoy all the benefits of society and are insulated from most of its problems. As a result (gestures around).

People are already not equal in today’s society. There are the 'have’s, there are the 'have not’s, and there’s everything in between. We’re not equal, but we should be.

Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen - Albert Einstein

What I love most about the game is the community’s refusal to spoil it for others. Spoilers exist, but you really have to look for them.

Honestly, it’s a testament to how good the game is that we all collectively, agreed to say nothing about it beyond “It’s incredible, I wish I could play it for the first time again. Go play it”. I wasn’t told to not spoil it, I just won’t.

Anyways, Outer Wilds is mine. There’s lots of games in this list that I love: MGS, KOTOR, FO:NV, I would rate all of them above Outer Wilds in a “my favourite game” list.

But, Outer Wilds really gains something from the first experience above and beyond what those others do, and it’s worth preserving.

Thank God I’m pretty

Every skill I ever have will be in question

Every ill that I must suffer, Clearly brought on by myself

Though the cops would come for someone else

I’m blessed

I disagree, the data disagrees, as far as opression Olympics is in any way useful. But I accept attractive people have challenges unique to them.

deleted by creator

Or, they want the genocide to stop.

This is the UK that Labour envisioned? Christ

Why are you still in my mentions. You can’t be trusted to say bye honestly, why should anyone trust you. Go away.

Meanwhile, I showed why you were wrong continually remember this:

You keep trying to frame it this way, this is wrong. The analogy doesn’t work with your substitutions. Third parties are smoking, Democrats are not smoking. Switching it around doesn’t work, the conditions are fundamentally different.

This is an assertion with nothing to back it up.

Axiom 1 Genocide is cancer, we agree genocide is bad.

Axiom 2. Voting for genocide is smoking

Axiom 3. Democrats support genocide.

For hours you couldn’t figure out why in your own analogy Dems were represented by chain smoking. You just kept asserting your nonsense. Then I gave it to you step by step and you dropped it.

Beyond embarrassing. That’s just one instance, remember this:

This is called a double standard. When judging others you judge them by the result of their actions and not their intentions. But you, you want to be judged by the intention of your actions and not the results.

People who oppose fascism at all costs inc genocide: well intentioned, it doesn’t matter their result.

People who oppose genocide at all costs inc Fascism: achieved nothing, it doesn’t matter their intention.

Double standards highlighted immediately.

Real leftists will see you you for the obstructionary you are, demanding zero progress for the support of a party, that by your own admission, is bad. Making the same demands the “white moderate” did for civil rights. Never accepting change until it’s forced upon you, and pretending you supported it all along.

You’re right no-one is reading this far down, fortunately, me constantly pointing out your BS is all up where it will be read. You misrepresented me immediately and was called out for it immediately. You were wrong multiple time and was shown to be immediately. All where it can be seen.

None of this down here matters, you achieved nothing here, just like supporting Dems achieved nothing. Your going away for good? I sure hope so, but you’ve proven yourself wrong about when you’re going before.

You cannot even be trusted to leave when you say you’re going to. When your words have such little value to you, why do you believe anyone else should value them higher. Go away.

Yes, this has been you the entire time: ignoring the argument, doubling down on refuted claims, trying to reverse it when that doesn’t work, and refusing to examine your own flawed logic.

Remember kids, when losing an argument take everything you been shown to be doing and claim the other person does it. It works for DJT, surely it will work for you. -The rationalist’s guide to argument

Bye

What does it mean when someone says ‘bye’ and doesn’t leave? I mean you just said bye, and here you are again? What gives?

No, actually what gives? Imagine trying to claim any amount of bad faith on my part when you can’t even be trusted to leave when you said you were going to. You said you were going, so GO.

I have been empathetic to your claims and feel you’ve explained yourself well. Fascism=bad, genocide=bad, why you voted what you voted, and why you don’t like what others are doing was all communicated well. For what it’s worth, and at risk of repeating myself, I see damage limitation as a valid POV.

I obviously dont feel like you’ve granted me the same courtesy of empathy, and I’m sure you think I’m as confused as ever.

That’s ok, I think people reading after will understand the claim that supporting dem is a cycle of bad-worse-bad-worse, until there is no worse to go… or you change for something “good” instead of “least bad”.

I think they’ll see that a new party is a very real option it’s happened before (when did UK Labour start, who did they replace) it’s happening now (who the fuck were Reform UK last election cycle). UK is a FPTP 2 party system too.

I think they’ll see that opposing genocide is a valid and good priority have. Convincing the electorate to vote the exact right amount of genocide: can’t be too much (republican), can’t be too little (anyone else), the genocide amount has to be just right (dem). That was was a foolish campaign for dem leadership to run, blame those in power.

That’s a point, it came and went but I think they’ll see that we blame leadership (the people with the power) in every field. Except politics for some reason, then it’s the little guy’s fault. “Sure Elon musk is a cunt, but have you seen the way Jerry sweeps floors, that’s what’s really fucking the stock”, “Facebook maybe designed to be a rage inducing, attention hogging machine by the Zuck, but if we just had more users, maybe we’ll reverse the systemic alt-right pipeline”.

We don’t agree that’s fine. What I thing is not fine is that this comment was me just re-stating what I’ve already said. If I wasnt on mobile I think this could have all been quotes from previous comments. I don’t think you’ve said anything substantially new either, that must be frustrating too.

Let me know if you can be convinced that: perhaps voting for a party that, by your own admission, is bad (genocidily so) might not be in your best interest. Or let me know if you think of a new reason why voting for a party that, by your own admission, is bad (genocidily so) might be in someone else’s best interest. We’ve covered: they’re the ‘bad’ in the “worse, bad, worse” cycle, and you don’t want the worse, so take the bad. We’ve covered: you don’t think good will win, so you won’t vote for them, and because you won’t vote for them you don’t think they’ll win, so vote bad.

Actually, just go away. You announced your departure 5 hours ago. You’ve tried to dismiss me in every ‘thought terminating’ way you could. Why are you still here?! Why “waste your time”? Why, if I lack the ability to learn do you still harass me? Please leave me alone.

Remember kids, when you’re losing an argument, that’s not time for introspection. It was a “waste of time” - a rationalist’s guide to argument.

Bye

What does it mean when someone says ‘bye’ and doesn’t leave? I mean you just said bye, and here you are again? What gives?

We don’t agree that’s fine. What I thing is not fine is that this comment was me just re-stating what I’ve already said. If I wasnt on mobile I think this could have all been quotes from previous comments. I don’t think you’ve said anything substantially new either, that must be frustrating too.

Let me know if you can be convinced that: perhaps voting for a party that, by your own admission, is bad (genocidily so) might not be in your best interest. Or let me know if you think of a new reason why voting for a party that, by your own admission, is bad (genocidily so) might be in someone else’s best interest. We’ve covered: they’re the ‘bad’ in the “worse, bad, worse” cycle, and you don’t want the worse, so take the bad. We’ve covered: you don’t think good will win, so you won’t vote for them, and because you won’t vote for them you don’t think they’ll win, so vote bad.