𝕽𝖚𝖆𝖎𝖉𝖍𝖗𝖎𝖌𝖍

Actually, really good point. Sorry, person-I-responded-to. I thought you (PIRT) were comparing Maria to Postgres, when you (PIRT) were referring to Maria vs MySQL.

Both PostgreSQL and MariaDB are OSS and free; MySQL is covered with cooties and boogers, and you don’t want to get any of it on you.

Maria database is free and open source.

Why are you implying that PostgreSQL isn’t?

Great clarifications!

Once a year or so, I re-learn how to interpret Smart values, which I find frustratingly obtuse. Then I promptly forget .

So one’s almost 6 y/o and the other is about 5½?

I think I see what you’re saying.

B2 has multiple data centers around the world - at least 3 in the US and 1 in EU, that I know of. If you want your data replicated, you have to create buckets in multiple locations and connect them for replication, which they’ll do for you (the replication).

If you’re saying that they don’t automatically store multiple copies of your data in multiple locations for you, for free, you’re right. But they do have multiple data centers located around the world, and you can create multiple buckets and configure them for automatic replication so you have redundancy. You have to pay for the storage at each replicated location, though. If you want a bucket in Sacramento, it’ll cost you those pennies. If you want it replicated to Rest on, you’ll pay double the pennies. If you want it also replicated to Amsterdam, triple the pennies.

I don’t think it’s fair to say that they’re single location that could have a natural disaster and you therefore lose your storage. It’s only like that if you set it up that way, and it’s pretty trivial to set up global replication - it just costs more.

I quadrupal vote for this combination.

You could trust B2 more; maybe dig into their structure. They’re solid, and not only that they provide an awesome service with their yearly HD failure rate evaluations, in which they describe the structure of their data centers.

I’m terms of NPS, I’m on their side. Unless something comes out and shady business practices, I’m brand loyal to B2. Been with then for years, and love the service, pricing, and company.

I mean, someday I’ll get a new TV, and I’d just been assuming I’d leave it disconnected… but I hadn’t thought about the nagware, and that would definitely be an issue.

Hmm. Just curious: did you try creating a tar pit subnet for it, which it could connect to but not escape from?

You duplicated Bluesky’s entry for Nostr. Could you address nostr’s weaknesses? Keeping in mind that as long as you don’t federate with the main Nostr nodes, you won’t be swamped with the CryptoBros - its biggest downside.

It’s been years since I’ve shopped for a TV, but… can’t you just not connect it to the internet? I have a little microPC running Linux connected to our TV; it’s smarter than any other TV I’ve seen, but the TV itself is stupid.

Why can’t someone just get a smart TV and just never let it get online?

I mean, sure, if I had my 'druthers, I wouldn’t be paying for features I don’t use, but if it’s literally impossible to buy dumb TVs, what’s the issue?

There is a project to standardize (and document) the API, called OpenSubsonic. It includes extensions, but the main value is that it tries to consistently document expected behavior. It’s an uphill battle, because the Subsonic API is a schizophrenic mess, and no two servers interpret API responses the same way, but it’s still a decent project. I contribute to a client, and we try to adhere to the OpenSubsonic documentation.

My only criticism about the API is that it’s focused on streaming, which means we can’t consolidate server control (e.g. mpd) and streaming, which would make writing versatile clients easier, but still.

Tempo is a fantastic client, BTW, and has largely replaced my local offline client use.

And that, kids, is a great use of RAID: under some other form of data redundancy.

Great story!

RAID 1 is mirroring. If you accidentally delete a file, or it becomes corrupt (for reasons other than drive failure), RAID 1 will faithfully replicate that delete/corruption to both drives. RAID 1 only protects you from drive failure.

Implement backups before RAID. If you have an extra drive, use it for backups first.

There is only one case when it’s smart to use RAID on a machine with no backups, and that’s RAID 0 on a read-only server where the data is being replicated in from somewhere else. All other RAID levels only protect against drive failure, and not against the far more common causes of data loss: user- or application-caused data corruption.