r00ty

I think people’s experience with PLE will always be subjective. In the old flat we were in, where I needed it. It would drop connection all the time, it was unusable.

But I’ve had them run totally fine in other places. Noisy power supplies that aren’t even in your place can cause problems. Any kind of impulse noise (bad contacts on an old style thermostat for example) and all kinds of other things can and will interfere with it.

Wifi is always a compromise too. But, I guess if wiring direct is not an option, the OP needs to choose their compromise.

Per 100g is quite normal across Europe too (because you can kinda treat the values like a percentage or at least compare to any other product). We usually in the UK have per 100g and either per serving size or package size.

Work laptop, it stays closed, and I use my two screens connected to it. After Covid, everyone wanted video calls. Nope, I’m not getting the laptop out from the back of the desk for you.

Anyone hacking the webcam can get a view of the base of the laptop.

I’d like a proper hardware light. Something physical such that the camera cannot send the image back to the board without the light being on. And yes, a physical cutout switch would definitely be nice.

I’m in the ntppool.org pool for the UK. It randomly assigns servers which could be any stratum really (but there is quality control on the time provided). I also have stratum 2 servers in .fi, and .fr (which are dedicated servers I also use for other things, rather than a raspberry pi).

No. A GPS (with PPS) hat. That counts as a stratum 0 time source, making the NTP server stratum 1.

Well I run an ntp stratum 1 server handling 2800 requests a second on average (3.6mbit/s total average traffic), and a flight radar24 reporting station, plus some other rarely used services.

The fan only comes on during boot, I’ve never heard it used in normal operation. Load averages 0.3-0.5. Most of that is Fr24. Chrony takes <5% of a single core usually.

It’s pretty capable.

I said what I said!

That should be illegal. Any editor containing the letters vi together must not use any keys except those that can be sent over a vt100 terminal!

I feel like there’s a lot of misunderstanding about what I’m trying to say.

I’m saying the average windows user will begin to get fatigue when some installers ask for elevation 3 times (maybe more). They’ll end up just pavlovian clicking OK whenever that prompt appears. Which ends up circumventing the whole reason the prompt exists.

Sudo is very different. You need to explicity enter your password. It may be cached for a short time and I’d argue that’s actually better.

If I’m installing something, it asks for my password once but can then raise to root multiple times that’s fine.

If I’m installing something and it asks for elevation three times, for example it needs to Install multiple drivers. It generates an automatic click when installing for many unexperienced users. It’s dangerous imo.

It can’t really be compared to Sudo.

Here’s the problem. So many legitimate things need elevation, and often multiple times in a single install. Guess what most Windows users do, when they see an elevation prompt. What do you reckon?

I mix and match. I used to have an Amiga back in the day, and they were called directories there. As such, most of my parlance is from those days. But most of my work life has been on Windows. So, folder has sneaked into everyday usage.

Do not boot that on Friday!

People that complain about people not running systemd. Why does it bother you so much? :P

Not sure, this wasn’t clear to me from their pricing page. There were 4 stars next to that item but the explanation for that didn’t elaborate on bulk retrieve.

I assumed there was some minimum number of operations, or it had to be the entire backup restored to count as bulk.

But isn’t that the point? You pay a low fee for inconvenient access to storage in the hope you never need it. If you have a drive failure you’d likely want to restore it all. In which case the bulk restore isn’t terrible in pricing and the other option is, losing your data.

I guess the question of whether this is a service for you is how often you expect a NAS (that likely has redundancy) to fail, be stolen, destroyed etc. I would expect it to be less often than once every 5 years. If the price to store 12TB for 5 years and then restore 12TB after 5 years is less than the storage on other providers, then that’s a win, right? The bigger thing to consider is whether you’re happy to wait for the data to become available. But for a backup of data you want back and can wait for it’s probably still good value. Using the 12TB example.

Backblaze, simple cost. $6x12 = $72/month which over a 5-year period would be $4320. Depending on whether upload was fast enough to incur some fees on the number of operations during backup and restore might push that up a bit. But not by any noticeable amount, I think.

For amazon glacier I priced up (I think correctly, their pricing is overly complicated) two modes. Flexible access and deep archive. The latter is probably suitable for a NAS backup. Although of course you can only really add to it, and not easily remove/adjust files. So over time, your total stored would likely exceed the amount you actually want to keep. Some complex “diff” techniques could probably be utilised here to minimise this waste.

Deep archive
12288 put requests @ $0.05 = $614.40
Storage 12288GB per month = $12.17 x 60 = $729.91
12288 get requests @ $0.0004 = $4.92
12288GB retrieval @ $0.0025 / GB x 12288 = $30.72 (if bulk possible)
12288GB retrieval @ $0.02 / GB x 12288 = $245.76 (if bulk not possible)

Total: $1379.95 / $1594.99

Flexible
12288 put requests @ $0.03 = $368.64
Storage 12288GB per month = $44.24 x 60 = $2654.21
12288 get requests @ $0.0004 = $4.92
12288GB retrieval @ $0.01 / GB x 12288 = $122.88

Total: $3150.65

In my mind, if you just want to push large files you’re storing on a high capacity NAS somewhere they can be restored on some rainy day sometime in the future, deep archive can work for you. I do wonder though, if they’re storing this stuff offline on tape or something similar, how they bring back all your data at once. But, that seems to me to be their problem and not the user’s.

Do let me know if I got any of the above wrong. This is just based on the tables on the S3 pricing site.

So there’s three problems you are very likely to encounter.

1. Most providers now almost certainly filter their egress for netblocks under their control to prevent ip spoofing. So it’s likely the packets would never make it out at all.

2: if it does work the return path would be over the normal Internet route and not via the vpn. Only the sent packets would go via the vpn host.

3: if the client is behind nat the router will not recognise the response packets as belonging to an open connection and will drop them.

I’m really not sure what your intention is.

Yeah, not sure how many isps block it. They didn’t used to 10 years or so ago. I used to block unknown ips at my egress.

But they should, and I’m hoping they do now.

I’m also not too sure what the point would be for the OP. Even if their isp allows the ip spoofing the response would take the normal route back to the vpn client.

Well, more specifically it is protecting against a specific form of data loss, which is hardware failure. A good practice if you’re able is to have RAID and an offsite/cloud backup solution.

But if you don’t, don’t feel terrible. When the OVH datacentre had a fire, I lost my server there. But so did a lot of businesses. You’d be amazed at how many had no backup and were demanding that OVH somehow pry their smouldering drives from what remained of the datacentre wing and salvage all the data.

If you care about your data, you want a backup that is off-site. Cloud backup is quite inexpensive these days.