Right, but you could have just made one yourself

And then there would be a bus factor of one. It’s not just about making a helm chart for myself, it’s about having something that can be shared with the community, that doesn’t depend on any single person to be maintained and updated.

It’s about having an organization that provides “packages” for Kubernetes, for people/orgs that don’t have the time, expertise, and energy to maintain them.

I greatly respect Ananace, who is in the comments of this post, and mentioned their Helm charts. The work is excellent. But looking through the commits, it’s just one person, doing something that primarily consists of bumping version numbers. Contrast this to the Matrix ESS helm chart, where the commits consist of many more contributors, and also include feature additions to the helm chart.

Hello Ananace! :)

I actually have seen your helm charts many, many times before when searching for matrix, synapse, or lemmy on Artifacthub.

An official helm chart isn’t really a hard requirement to me, even if I were to use one and it were to stop getting maintained, I could continue on my own. But an official helm chart has big community benefits that are very important to me. Like, there becomes the option of paid support, which is a must have for many entities. Also, an official organization may support a wider variety of usecases than someone making helm charts for personal use.

I also ended up chatting with one of the core devs of Synapse about ways to improve regular Python Synapse for use with Kubernetes back in the ending of January, so hopefully it’ll improve in that direction when time allows

Do you know anything about the claims that they have rewritten synapse in rust?

Yes and no. There are many things that are much easier with Kubernetes, once you figure Kubernetes out.

High availability is the most notable example — yes, it’s doable in docker, via something like swarm, but it’s more difficult. In comparison, the ideas of clustering and working with more than one server are central to the architecture of Kubernetes.

Another thing is that long term deployments with Kubernetes can be more maintainable, since everything is just yaml files and version is just a number. If you store your config in code, then it’s easier to replicate it to another server, either internally, or if you share it for other people to use (Helm is somewhat like this).

This helm chart is not just matrix/synapse, but also element (web ui), and “matrix authentication service”, which adds SSO/OIDC support to a normal synapse instance, which is pretty neat. I haven’t seen any helm charts that include the full matrix stack, just separate synapse or element helm charts. And helm definitely makes deploying services to Kubernetes easier than other ways of deploying applications.

The other reason why I like an official helm chart, is because I have seen unofficial one’s be stopped being maintained by the community member(s) maintaining them. With an official one, it will (probably) be maintained indefinitely.

Damn. Yast had some really unique features like the ability to configure grub, which cockpit doesn’t have.

Docs:

https://www.psycopg.org/psycopg3/docs/basic/params.html#danger-sql-injection

In the comments, they state that it is point cloud data for gaussian splatting. I don’t know what that is, but I suspect is is information that may not be best handled by git.

Edit: and high fidelity extended reality content.

Edit3: yeah, it looks like they are putting large amounts of binary data in the repo.

Licenses like SSPLv1

The SSPL requires that all software used to deploy SSPL software is open sourced. If I deploy my software on Windows, do I have to provide the source code for Windows? What about the proprietary hardware drivers, or Intel Management Engine?

The SSPL is not the next generation of licenses, it is effectively unusable. And both Redis and Mongo, dual licensed their software as the SSPL, and a proprietary license — effectively making their entire software proprietary.

make money without risk of a cloud vendor snapping up their software (think Redis, MongoDB, etc) need a place at the table.

Except Redis, and Mongo were making money. They had well valued, well earning SAAS offerings — it’s just that the offerings integrated into existing cloud vendors would be more popular (because vendor lock in). They just wanted more money, and were hoping that by going proprietary, they could force customers away from the cloud offers to themselves, and massively increase their revenue… They did not get that.

Another thing is that it’s not “stealing” Mongo/Redis’ when cloud vendors offer SAAS’s of Mongo/Redis. Mongo/Redis, and their SAAS offerings, are only possible because the same cloud vendors put more money than Mongo/Redis make yearly into Linux and other software that powers the SAAS offerings of Mongo/Redis, like Kubernetes. Without that software, Mongo/Redis wouldn’t have a SAAS offering at all.

I definitely think that it’s bad when a piece of software doesn’t get any funding it needs to develop, especially when it powers much more modern software, like XZ. But Mongo/Redis weren’t suffering from a lack of funding at all. They’re just mad they had to share their toys, and tried to take them away. But it didn’t even matter in the end.

I switched to Incus for my homelab.

Blogpost: https://moonpiedumplings.github.io/projects/build-server-6/

I use a wacom intuos + xournal++.

The wacom is nice because it has bluetooth and pretty much “just works” on Linux.

Xournal++ lets me edit pdf files and/or export stuff as pdf. I also like that I can add text with xournal++.

Because you can run a “rootfull xwayland” session which is essentially an X11 session but rewritten to be more maintanable.

After this, it’s a lot harder to be opposed to the loss of X11, because you don’t really lose it.

I switched to fennec and it’s basically instant. Fennec also gets ublock origin, a much better adblocker. But I’ve been too lazy to switch before this.

Anubis takes around 5 minutes on cromite browser.

It doesn’t work at all for users without javascript. The creator of anubis is investigating an alternative

It’s a lot more complex than “enable everywhere immediately”.

Try translated Chinese web serials.

Try 40 milenniums of cultivation. It’s half fantasy though, with it’s own magic system. Actually, most web serials I read are fantasy, I haven’t seen much sci fi.

There are also actual novels though, like the 3 body problem, which was popular enough to get adapted to a netflix series but I only really care about web serials.

The mitre cve database is more like that big block just below what’s being pointed too.

But it does look like they have a backup plan: https://www.thecvefoundation.org/

I thought you were going to link to this.

Joysticks on the bottom again… whyyyyy…

My hands find that setup so uncomfortable, I wish they would put them on the top.

All these people explaining that server side anti cheat is “easier”. Let me explain to you the real reason why games use client side anti cheat:

1. It used to be, gamers could self host servers. These servers, would almost always have an active moderator who would instantly ban any cheater. I’ve watched quite a few cheaters get instabanned on games like this.
2. But then, companies decided to deny gamers the control and ability to self host their own server which they could moderate. They decided to force everyone to play on one server — their server.
3. However, they quickly realized that they were unable, or unwilling to spend money on moderators to ensure a high quality experience.
4. Ergo — client side anti cheat. In addition to continuing their control over servers, now they also gain a degree of control over clients.

I’ve heard one rebuttal to this: Not all cheaters can be spotted by a human, sometimes they pretend to be a really good player.

To be blunt: I don’t really care. I don’t really understand why people care about that kind of cheater either. The point of kicking cheaters is to keep the game fun by not having everybody get crushed. But if the cheater is just like another good player, then they’re just another good player to me.

I used to play this browser game, https://krunker.io. It’s a browser based FPS game, and due to being browser based it was really, really easy to write cheats. The devs gave up after like a month, and simply stopped updating the anti-cheat, opting for a different system instead — deputization. Players would become “krunker police”, and while playing, if a cheater was reported, then they would anonymously, and silently watch, and then take action.

It worked pretty well, then krunker got bought by a mobile gaming company and the game lost a lot of members. But I think the original io browser game is still under full creative control by the devs though, it’s just the discord, facebook, and mobile versions of the game that are enshittified.

Anyway, when I was playing a few months ago, I encountered a cheater in one of our lobbies. They were trolling, while advertising cheats. But there were like 5 good players in the lobby, it was a cracked lobby, and we stomped them. They couldn’t even make it to top 4/8 people.

Imagine aimbotting, advertising those aimbots, and still getting stomped. We called them out on that, and they just left. And that moment was a shit ton of fun.

But anyway, in the comments, I see some of this same sentiment that companies parrot: That cheaters are inherently bad, and need to be stopped because cheating is bad. This frustrates me because cheaters are not the only entity which can make a game unfun, there are also other toxic elements which should be moderated, but are often not, because of the focus on cheaters.

Play with cheaters, or play without DRM/Kernel level anti-cheat, pick one

Like this snipped from one of the comments below.

But people do cheat with DRM/Kernel level anti-cheat? I can think of 3 ways to do it off the top of my head:

• Undetected virtual machine
• Physical device that uses DMA to modify memory
• Editing of device drivers that have DMA access

And I especially hate this particular dichotomy because, by assuming DRM/Kernel level anti-cheat is invincible, it creates a sort of “blindspot”, where when someone does cheat, they may not get noticed because it’s assumed they are unable to cheat in the game, which is not the case.

I don’t think so, now. You’ll have to do those yourself.