primarily security cameras and network video recorders (NVRs)
Referring to security cameras and recorders as webcams is irresponsible clickbait. Its just needlessly drumming up fear in the general public, who won’t read the article and will now think their webcam is infected.
Thanks, I’ve been on the fence for a while, doing the free trial now
I’ve been pronouncing it N-gin-X, which is probably close enough once slurred together
What is openwebzine? Can’t find any info on it.
256gb of ram seems well beyond standard self-hosting, what are you planning on running?!
I did create a fork and MR, and neither used your runner (sorry if that is what spooked you).
Develop local and push remote also let’s you sanitize what is public and what isnt. Keep your half-backed personal projects local, push the good stuff to github for job opportunities.
I think it was when you create a merge request back, that the original repo would then run the forked branch on the original runners.
From what I can tell, its now been much more locked down, so its better, but still worth being careful about.
More discussion: https://www.reddit.com/r/github/comments/1eslk2d/forks_and_selfhosted_action_runners/
The other potential risk is that the github action author maliciously modifies their code in a later version, but that is solved with version pinning the actions.
I can’t find it right now, but there used to be a warning about not self-hosting runners for public repos. Anyone could fork your repo, and the fork would inherit your runners, and then they could change the pipeline to RCE on your runner.
Has that been fixed?
I went to a completely private gitlab instead, with mirroring up to github for anything that needed to be public.
Edit: seems to maybe not be an issue anymore, at the very least it doesn’t seem to affect that repo. Still, for anyone else, make sure forks and MRs can’t cause action to run automatically on your runner, because that would be very bad.
This is my personal opinion, but you should add :
Unless there is a really good reason, don’t rename your project. It only adds confusion, and users will get lost during the transition. It also makes them hesitant to try the new one - “What if they do it again and i get left behind”.
Pihole isnt pi specific either, it still kept the name.
Is a secondhand “official” nuc not an option?
I can’t speak to any of the Chinese brands, but minisforum seems well liked.
For what’s worth, your making the right call. I did this a few years back with some second hand nucs, and everything has just been way smoother to deal with on x86
Still sounds like it could get quite messy if Google adds a feature, Qualcomm adds a fix to that feature and then you need to add a fix on top of that. Does it work better in practice and just needs to been seen to be understood?
Competence, Time and Direction are often quite hard to find in any professional team, let alone an open source team :D
Are you at liberty to describe those strategies further? Or point to some other resource? Its never been a situation that affects me, so I’m curious to learn more.
Requirements gathering is really really difficult, and its why I am currently not worried about an LLM taking my job.
For my work, I had a project where the requirements were gathered for us, which stated that A was completely forbidden, but X, Y and Z were required. We developed to that spec, released it, and it turned out that the users actually needed A all along. We added A, and now A is the only feature they use… Shame, because X, Y and Z were cool features, and I was really proud of them, but a complete waste of time developing them.
Yup, so convincing upstream to take the changes is really the only option, which gets you back to point 1.
As a developer (not affiliated with either of those projects), you have to understand a couple of points:
Adding features means increased maintenance burden. Any feature that is added must be tested and maintained, and once released, often cannot be changed without significant user push back.
Users often have no idea what they actually want. If a project just implements what every user asks for, it’ll end up being a disjointed mess of a project. Developers have to draw a line somewhere.
Unless someone is paying for the work, developers have zero incentive to make changes. A democratic committee can make all the requests they like, but unless the developers are on board, nothing will happen. (Also, tying into 2, but good luck getting a committee of users to agree on anything)
The only real answer is to fork the software, make the changes and hope that either everyone switches to your fork, or the upstream accepts the changes. That is the Open Source way of doing things.
Every day, JS strays further from gods light :D
My favourite one is:
i -=- 1
Container overhead is near zero. They are not virtualized or anything like that, they are just processes on your host system that are isolated. Its functionally not much more different to chroot.
No one forced apple to announce AI. They could have just waited until they had something ready.