I’m sure there are several out there. But, when I was starting out, I didn’t see one and just rolled my own. The process was general enough that I’ve been able to mostly just replace the SteamID of the game in the Dockerfile and have it work well for other games. It doesn’t do anything fancy like automatic updating; but, it works and doesn’t need anything special.

I see containers as having a couple of advantages:

1. Separation of dependencies - while not as big of issue as it used to be, just knowing that you won’t end up with the requirements for one application conflicting with another is one less issue to worry about. Additionally, you can do anything you want to one container, without having an effect on another container. You don’t get stuck wanting to reboot or revert the system, but not wanting to break a different running service.
2. Portability - Eventually, you are going to replace the OS of that VM (at least, you should). Moving a container to a new OS is dead simple. Re-installing an application on a new OS, moving data and configs can be anywhere from easy to a pain in the arse, depending on the software.
3. Easier fall back - Have you ever upgraded an application and had everything go to shit? In my years working as a sysadmin, I lost way too many evenings to this sort of bullshit. And while VM snapshots should make reverting easy, sometimes it just didn’t work out that way. Containers force enough separation of applications that you can do just about anything to one container and not effect others.
4. Less dependency on a single install - Have you ever had a system just get FUBAR, and after a few hours of digging the answer seems to be, just format the drive and start over? Maybe you tried some weird application out and the uninstall wasn’t really clean. By having all that crap happen in containers, you can isolate the damage. Nuke the container, nuke the image, and the base OS is still clean.
5. Easier version testing - Want to try out upgrading to version 2 of an application, but worried that it may not be fully baked yet or the new configs may take a while to get right? Do it off in a separate container on a copy of the data. You can do this with VMs and snapshots; but, I find containers to be less overhead.

That all said, if an application does not have an official container image, the added complexity of creating and maintaining your own image can be a significant downside. One of my use cases for containers is running game servers (e.g. Valheim). There isn’t an official image; so, I had to roll my own. The effort to set this up isn’t zero and, when trying to sort out an image for a new game, it does take me a while before I can start playing. And those images need to be updated when a new version of the game releases. Technically, you can update a running container in a lot of cases; but, I usually end up rebuilding it at some point anyway.

I’d also note that, careful use of VMs and snapshots can replicate or mitigate most of the advantages I listed. I’ve done both (decade and a half as a sysadmin). But, part of that “careful use” usually meant spinning up a new VM for each application. Putting multiple applications on the same OS install was usually asking for trouble. Eventually, one of the applications would get borked and having the flexibility to just nuke the whole install saved a lot of time and effort. Going with containers removed the need to nuke the OS along with the application to get a similar effect.

At the end of the day, though. It’s your box, you do what you are most comfortable with and want to support. If that’s a monolithic install, then go for it. While I, or other might find containers a better answer for us, maybe it isn’t for you.

I’m not going to defend everything the TSA does. And they do have a lot of problems. But, the lines at the checkpoint are the result of trade-offs in security. For all things security related, it’s about managing risk. You will never eliminate risk, so you need to pick and choose where to apply controls to reduce the worst risks and accept some risk in other areas.

Think about the possible outcomes from terrorist attacks on airports. There are several possible scenarios:

1. The attacker kills a few people in the airport using a direct weapon (gun, knife, etc.)
2. The attacker kills a lot of people in a small area with a area weapon (bomb, gas, chemical, etc.)
3. The attacker destroys an airplane in flight, killing everyone onboard.
4. The attacker hijacks the airplane and takes everyone onboard for ransom.
5. The attacker hijacks the airplane and uses it as a weapon, killing everyone on board and more people on the ground.

We could probably come up with other cases, but I think this covers the bulk of it. So, let’s dive into managing these risks. What are the effects of such attacks, if successful?
Looking at case 1, how many people are likely to be killed? Well, that depends on the police response time and the effectiveness of the attacker’s weapon. But, based on other mass casualty events, this probably falls into the range of 10-30 people. It could move outside this range, but this is pretty typical of such situations. To pick a number in the middle, will say they the expected loss for such an attack is around 20.
With Case 2, again there is variability. But, it’s also something we have analogs for and may be able to put a range of casualties on. The Boston Marathon bombing in 2013 killed 6. The attack on Kabul Airport in 2021 during the US evacuation killed 182, though that also included multiple gunmen attacking after the explosion. Let’s put the loss rate around 50 for as single bomb, assuming a very packed area and a very effective bomb.
For Case 3, the numbers are a bit easier to get a handle on. Typical airliners carry anywhere from 100-200 passengers. The 737 MAX 8-200 is designed for 200, while the Airbus A200-100 carries around 100 passengers. We’ll pin the loss rate here at 150, as attackers are likely to target larger aircraft for this sort of attack.
Case 4 is basically Case 3, but with an optional loss of only money. For that reason, I’m going to remove this case, but wanted to mention it to avoid the “well akshuly” crowd, since this is a historic problem.
That leaves Case 5. And it’s Case 4’s situation, plus some number of people on the ground. Certainly, not every such use of an airplane as a weapon will be as successful as the attack on 9/11. And that also involved multiple successful attacks. But, let’s assume that such attacks will hit populated buildings and cause significant damage. We’ll pin the expected loss at 200, This is 150 for the airplane and 50 on the ground, somewhat equivalent to Case 2 with a bomb in a crowded area.

Ok, so we have expected losses, now lets talk about how often we expect such attacks to happen? And yes, this is a rough guess. But, since terrorists are unlikely to publish their plans, it’s the best we can do. We also face a difficulty in that these are still (thankfully) pretty rare events. And trying to extrapolate from a small set of data points is always a fraught exercise. So, fell free to quibble over these numbers, but I don’t think any numbers which fall into a reasonable range will change things much.
Case 1 - This attack as a pretty low barrier to entry. If a person can be found to perform the attack, arming them isn’t terribly hard. So, we let’s assume we get 2 of these attacks a year. I don’t think we’re actually getting that, but out goal is just to get into the right ballpark.
Case 2 - This attack takes a touch more work, bomb making isn’t that hard, but making a really effective one isn’t easy either. This type of attack does have the advantage that it doesn’t always require the attacker to die in the process. So, it might be easier to find someone willing to engage in such an attack. Let’s call this 1 per year.
Case 3 - This also requires a bomb, but it may not need to be quite as big to be effective. Granted, modern aircraft can be amazingly resilient (see Aloha Flight 243). This attack also results in the attacker dying, so that can be a bit harder to source. So, lets say this happens once every other year, or 1/2 per year.
Case 5 - So, no bomb this time, but you have to have an attacker not only willing to die in the process, but also go through enough flight training to fly the aircraft to it’s target. And you need the training itself. Plus, the attacker needs to get a weapon onto the aircraft. And since they need to overpower 100-200 people who might just take exception to the hijacking, you probably need multiple attackers willing to die in the attack. This is a pretty high bar to clear; so, let’s say that these attacks happen at a rate of 1 every 5 years.

Ok, so let’s consider our Annualized Loss Expectancy (ALE) with what we have:

Alright, so lets start talking about controls we can use to mitigate these attacks. By raw numbers, the thing we should care about most is Case 3, as that has the highest ALE. So, what can we do about bombs on airplanes? Making them more resilient seems like a good start, but if we could do that, the military would have done it long ago. So, really the goal is to keep bombs out of airplanes. And that’s going to mean some sort of screening. We could just say “no carry on, period” and move the problem to the cargo hold. This would reduce the frequency of Case 3 and Case 5, as it would be much harder to get a bomb or weapon onto an airplane, without a bag to hide them in. But, travelers are not likely to give up all carried on bags. So, that really leaves us with searching bags and controlled checkpoints to do it. Of course, as has been noted, this would likely mean that Cases 1 and 2 become deadlier. Let’s put some numbers to it. Let’s say that checkpoints reduce the frequency of Cases 3 and 5 by a factor of 4 and increase the Loss Expectancy of Cases 1 and 2 by 1.5.

And we could push the numbers around for the effect of the checkpoints. And we could look at other controls or controls in combination. But, this is the sort of risk analysis which would need to be done to make such decisions. And, ideally, the numbers chosen would be done with a bit more care than my rectal extraction method. Can I say that anyone at the TSA/DHS/etc did this sort of analysis? No, but I suspect there has been some work on it. And it probably does lead to the conclusion that the expected loss is lower for airports with checkpoints than airports without. Though, that doesn’t excuse the TSA’s abysmal track record for tests done by the FBI.

It’s right there in the article:

Reviver’s $29.99 monthly subscription fee.

What, you thought this was supposed to help the customer?

Reviver’s $29.99 monthly subscription fee.

Someone, somewhere is making money on these and probably providing kickbacks campaign contributions to get laws passed to allow this sort of stupid.

My list of items I look for:

• A docker image is available. Not some sort of make or build script which make gods know what changes to my system, even if the end result is a docker image. Just have a docker image out on Dockerhub or a Dockerfile as part of the project. A docker-compose.yaml file is a nice bonus.
• Two factor auth. I understand this is hard, but if you are actually building something you want people to seriously use, it needs to be seriously secured. Bonus points for working with my YubiKey.
• Good authentication logging. I may be an outlier on this one, but I actually look at the audit logs for my services. Having a log of authentication activity (successes and failures) is important to me. I use both fail2ban to block off IPs which get up to any fuckery and I manually blackhole entire ASNs when it seems they are sourcing a lot of attacks. Give me timestamps (in ISO8601 format, all other formats are wrong), IP address, username, success or failure (as a independent field, not buried in a message or other string) and any client information you can (e.g. User-Agent strings).
• Good error logging. Look, I kinda suck, I’m gonna break stuff. When I do, it’s nice to have solid logging giving me an idea of what I broke and to provide a standardized error code to search on. It also means that, when I give up and post it as an issue to your github page, I can provide you with some useful context.

As for that hackernews response, I’d categorically disagree with most of it.

An app, self-contained, (essentially) a single file with minimal dependencies.

Ya…no. Complex stuff is complex. And a lot of good stuff is complex. My main, self-hosted app is NextCloud. Trying to run that as some monolithic app would be brain-dead stupid. Just for the sake of maintainability, it is going to need to be a fairly sprawling list of files and folders. And it’s going to be dependent on some sort of web server software. And that is a very good place to NOT roll your own. Good web server software is hard, secure web server software is damn near impossible. Let the large projects (Apache/Nginx) handle that bit for you.

Not something so complex that it requires docker.

“Requires docker” may be a bit much. But, there is a reason people like to containerize stuff, it avoids a lot of problems. And supporting whatever random setup people have just sucks. I can understand just putting a project out as a container and telling people to fuck off with their magical snowflake setup. There is a reason flatpak is gaining popularity.
Honestly, I see docker as a way to reduce complexity in my setup. I don’t have to worry about dependencies or having the right version of some library on my OS. I don’t worry about different apps needing different versions of the same library. I don’t need to maintain different virtual python environments for different apps. The containers “just work”. Hell, I regularly dockerize dedicated game servers just for my wife and I to play on.

Not something that requires you to install a separate database.

Oh goodie, let’s all create our own database formats and re-learn the lessons of the '90s about how hard databases actually are! No really, fuck off with that noise. If your app needs a small database backend, maybe try SQLite. But, some things just need a real database. And as with web servers, rolling your own is usually a bad plan.

Not something that depends on redis and other external services.

Again, sometimes you just need to have certain functionality and there is no point re-inventing the wheel every time. Breaking those discrete things out into other microservices can make sense. Sure, this means you are now beholden to everything that other service does; but, your app will never be an island. You are always going to be using libraries that other people wrote. Just try to avoid too much sprawl. Every dependency you spin up means your users are now maintaining an extra application. And you should probably build a bit of checking into your app to ensure that those dependencies are in sync. It really sucks to upgrade a service and have it fail, only to discover that one of it’s dependencies needed to be upgraded manually first, and now the whole thing is corrupt and needs to be restored from backup. Yes, users should read the release notes, they never do.
The corollary here is to be careful about setting your users up for a supply chain attack. Every dependency or external library you add is one more place for your application to be attacked. And just because the actual vulnerability is in SomeCoolLib.js, it’s still your app getting hacked. You chose that library, you’re now beholden to everything it gets wrong.

At the end of it all, I’d say the best app to write is the one you are interested in writing. The internet is littered with lots of good intentions and interesting starts. There is a lot less software which is actually feature complete and useful. If you lose interest, because you are so busy trying to please a whole bunch of idiots on the other side of the internet, you will never actually release anything. You do you, and fuck all the haters. If what you put out is interesting and useful, us users will show up and figure out how to use it. We’ll also bitch and moan, no matter how great your app is. It’s what users do. Do listen, feedback is useful. But, also remember that opinions are like assholes: everyone has one, and most of them stink.

I think it depends on what you want to print. Personally, most of my prints fit within a much smaller footprint. So, I don’t usually need my first layer to be perfect across the full bed. However, when trying to print something larger, I can absolutely tell how terrible my first layer is. It sucks to end up reprinting the first layer half a dozen times, because one small area keeps failing to adhere.

A large part of my issue is the printer I have just isn’t all that good. And, when I get less lazy, I’m going to just build a Voron. At that point, I’ll probably be one of those folks tweaking it until I get a perfect first layer. Because I want to be able to start a print and not spend the next hour fighting first layer problems.

Good marketing and lucky timing. He benefited greatly from the rise of MTV and music videos. With his talents for music and dance, he was the right person at the right time to really take off. His music videos were good.

And his PR people did fantastic work marketing him. Whoever convinced Disney to make the Captain EO ride at Disneyland was a genius.

This is what I use. Never had a problem and I love the auto download and removal features for subscribed podcasts.

For a similar story, which isn’t a urban legend. My mother used to be the main resource for an archeological information center in the US Southwest. When work crews dug up a body, she’d get a call from the coroner to ask, “is it yours or mine?” While both are going to want to know the cause of death, the coroner isn’t going to open a criminal case for a Native America burial.

Do you think it’s okay to not have an opinion on something?

Yes, absolutely. There are enough issues in the world that you probably don’t know about a lot of them. And even once you are made aware of an issue, you likely don’t have enough information to form a well considered opinion. It’s also possible that you will never have enough information on an issue to have a well formed opinion. You only have so many hours in a day and, unless an issue impacts you directly, it’s quite possible that you just won’t have the time to put into it. There’s no reason to feel bad about this, the issues that are most important to me may not be the issues which are most important to you.

How important is it to educate myself and ask questions?

Very important. If you are going to have an opinion on something, you should try to have a basic understanding of the issue. You’ll never be an expert on everything; but, for issues which you truly care about, you should have at least a passing understanding of the subject matter. Also, asking questions is always good. If someone is trying to shutdown your asking questions, you should start questioning that person’s motives.

Do you feel that pressure to have an opinion on everything?

Nope. One of the big secrets of life is learning to set boundaries. Just because someone else is incredibly passionate about something doesn’t mean you need to be. Learn to tell people “fuck you and the horse that came on you”. If that bothers them, then that’s their problem, not yours. This isn’t carte blanche to be an asshole, you should still strive to be a good person and act in pro-social ways. But, it does mean that you can draw a line and not have to own everyone else’s problems all the time.

Brussel Sprouts. Absolutely hated them as a kid, which I blame my mother for. She “steamed” them in the microwave in a dish with water. Turned them into a slimy, horrible mush. My wife sautes them in a pan, with bacon. It’s one of my absolute favorite dishes now.

What do having sexl in a canoe and American beer have in common? It’s fucking close to water

Hey now. Those Clydesdales are doing their absolute best to piss out Bud.

Ya, in fairness to MS, Windows XP was a good release (post SP1, like most “good” MS releases). But, the fact is that MS is going to push the latest version, regardless of how ready it is for use. MS was hot for folks to switch to Windows ME. And holy fuck was that a terrible OS. MS also did everything short of bribery to get folks to switch to Vista (anyone remember Windows Mojave?). The “upgrade, or else” mantra has always been their way. Not that I blame them too much, it does need to happen. It just sucks when the reason for the new OS is more intrusive ads and user tracking.

Many years ago, I attended a Windows XP launch event. The Microsoft presenter had the perfect line to describe how MS views this:
“Why should you upgrade to Windows XP? Because we’re going to stop supporting Windows 98!”

This was said completely unironically and with the expectation that people would just do what MS wanted them to do. That attitude hasn’t changed in the years since. Win 10 is going to be left behind. You will either upgrade or be vulnerable. Also, MS doesn’t care about the home users, they care about the businesses and the money to be had. And businesses will upgrade. They will invariably wait to the last minute and then scramble to get it done. But, whether because they actually give a shit about security or they have to comply with security frameworks (SOX, HIPAA, etc.), they will upgrade. Sure, they will insist on GPOs to disable 90% of the Ads and tracking shit, but they will upgrade.

I’ve always been highly introverted. And I struggled with talking to strangers. So, I set myself a goal of getting better at it and started forcing myself to talk with people more. I sucked at it and probably left a lot of people thinking I was some creepy weirdo. But, I got better the more I practiced. I’m still not fantastic at it, but I can generally initiate and maintain a conversation with a random stranger, without coming off too terribly. Like most skills in life, it takes practice and a lot of failure before you can rise to the level of not sucking at it.

What is your tolerance for tinkering? One option, which would give you a lot of control and flexibility over the printer would be to build a Voron. It’s tough to get more “open source” than a fully open source design. The 2.4 is also a CoreXY design and should cover just about everything you want.

Pretty sure that BambuLabs is misses on the requirement:

I want something as open source as possible that doesn’t phone home, and ideally not made in China.

I’d argue that the main reason you see more anime is the target audience.

Western animation is usually aimed at young children. For as much as I may have loved Disney’s Gummi Bears as a young child (decades later and I can still hear the theme song on my head), it’s now pretty painful to watch. Some shows have aged pretty well and some newer shows aren’t quite so bad. But, the target audience still seems to be younger children for much of it. There are exceptions, and several of those are pretty well known. For example, The Simpsons and Futurama are both popular animated shows, and both are not aimed at children.

Anime, by contrast is often aimed at teenagers. This means that it’s part of the audience’s formative years. People form bonds with the shows and carry some of those bonds into adulthood. And while the writing often falls into cringe inducing melodrama, there’s enough of it that is passable fun, usually simple hero stories. The shows can be like a comfy blanket that doesn’t insult the audience’s intelligence too much.

I’d also note that anime’s appeal goes back further than the 2000’s. My own introduction was Robotech, back in the 80’s. While it was a bastardized version of Macross, with some pretty awful writing (not that Macross’s writing is going to win awards any time soon) and a couple other shows, it was certainly a step above what most western studios were putting on for Saturday Morning cartoons. And that created a lifelong soft spot for anime. Heck, my desktop background is currently a Veritech Fighter. I still love the idea of Robotech, even if I only watch it in my memory through very heavily rose tinted glasses. And I imagine I’m not alone. The show may be different, but I suspect a lot of folks graduated from Disney and Hanna-Barbera cartoons to some type of anime as they got older and that anime was stuck with them.

Probably worth noting that, if you are using an employer owned system to watch said porn, they likely have software on the endpoint which will let them see what porn you are watching, regardless of HTTPS/VPN/Tor. Depending on how much your employer cares about such things, that may or may not come back to bite you. I’ve worked at places where we regularly reported on users watching porn on work computers, and I’ve worked at places where we only reported on users getting malware while browsing porn at work. But, never assume your activity isn’t being monitored on employer owned systems.