It entirely depends on how you want your homelab to work. I use a reverse proxy to set up subdomains for my publicly facing services because I find it easier and cleaner to assign a subdomain to each service, and I also like having HTTPS managed by a single point — a sort of single point of entry to the rest of the services. You’d have to decide what you want out of your homelab, and find and set up the services that yield the outcome that you want.

Instead of feeling the lumps on the skull for ADHD this quack use suspect brain scans.

Imo, it’s nearly equally as suspect to claim that there is no correlation between SPECT brain scans and ADHD as saying that there is a correlation between SPECT brain scans and ADHD. The point that I was trying to convey in the post is that he is harnessing extremely sparse, and far from established, research to try and sell things to people. That isn’t to say that there is established evidence to say that what he’s doing is indeed bogus, there’s simply little research to show that it actually works.

Is that stated in the documentation?

I don’t understand the downvotes that this post has received (Currently 8 upvotes and 27 downvotes). The post is just reporting on a finding. It’s not stating an opinion. Are people just unhappy that Trump’s polls have increased so they’re taking it out on this post? Is there something wrong with the article link? Is there some inaccuracy in the reporting? This feels like an example of shooting the messenger. Am I missing something?

I suppose there is the fundamental issue of people not collectively agreeing on what upvotes and downvotes should be used for.

Tea (PG Tips Original) with milk and sugar.

That’s an interesting idea, but I feel that it overcomplicates things without much benefit.

I apologize if I’ve offended you, as that wasn’t my intention — I’m only trying to understand your opinion. I’m aware that we have different opinions, I’m just curious what your rationale is for yours.

replying in individual comments is stupid and more confusing.

For clarity, would you mind explicitly stating why you believe that atomic comments are intrinsically more confusing?

I was trying to say that the hardware cost to host it may not be expensive, but the management cost could be quite costly.

you should look at a website called Kialo. I haven’t used it in years and I don’t know if it’s active but it’s an interesting concept based very much on that idea

Ah yeah, I’ve heard of that site. It definitely seems interesting, but I’m not too keen on getting invested in another centralized/non-fediverse service.

New comments have to be approved

Hrm, this feels like it has immense potential for administrative abuse.

I can definitely see the service’s potential, but I would like to see something like it that can connect with the Fediverse.

What do you mean by “it’s standard”? As in that is the intended functionality? It shouldn’t be — the whole point of blocking instances is for the user to be able to, well, block an instance, ie content originating from it no longer shows up.

It’s likely both. The ratio, however, I’m not sure of.

How about supporting users who want to improve their community instead of finding a new one?

I support that as well. My initial point was from the perspective of users not originating from lemmy.ml being annoyed with how lemmy.ml is administrating itself. If the users of lemmy.ml wish to stay to try and improve it, then I fully stand behind them, but, at the same time, I still support lemmy.ml’s autonomy.

It’s breaking the stated aim of open federation by tampering with comments, posts and mod records, which in turn get propagated or de-propagated to connected instances, right?

I’m not convinced that this is in conflict with the aim of federation. The whole point is to give people the power to create their own instances with their own rules instead of having to rely on a single central authority. The network isn’t necessarily distributed — it’s decentralized. An instance can administrate their content as they see fit. An instance cannot alter the content produced by any other instance. An instance can only manage the content originating from itself.

but 1) one instance (particular a significant one like ML) affects other instances

Would you mind being more specific?

they’re breaking the spirit of their own software by shamelessly abusing admin powers, in turn helping to normalize that behavior to the Lemmy side of the FV.

Hm, well, it depends on your perspective. The whole point of the Fediverse is to give people the freedom and power to control how they interact with the service. A server has the freedom to associate with the users that they wish in the same way that you have the freedom to consume what you wish. The spirit of the software is to enable people to have this freedom that otherwise wouldn’t exist with a large central service. The way I like to look at the Fediverse is where each instance is like a country, and each community is like a regional/state/provincial government within the country, and federation between instances is like cross-border policies between nations.

a supposedly transparent […] social network?

I’m not sure what you mean by “transparent”.

a supposedly […] user-run […] social network?

It is user-run, in that any user can create an instance.

a supposedly […] P2P social network?

It’s not P2P. A P2P network would be distributed. The Fediverse is decentralized.

I agree with both statements.

For sure. What the aforementioned bits of information provide is the ability to be confident in the privacy of software if one were to treat it as a black box, ie an average consumer.

Hm, I feel that it’s inaccurate to say “we wouldn’t be able to tell”. It’s not exactly a black box system — the app would have to run on an operating system, and if you are able to know what the operating system is doing, and what instructions are being executed by the CPU, then you can know exactly what the app is doing.

What the aforementioned bits of information provide is the ability to treat software as a black box and be sure of its safety without having to fundamentally audit it.

If this is in reply to the second quote, then I’m not really sure what point you are trying to make. You appear to be opposed to atomic comments because you don’t want to scroll for context, but the alternative, which I outlined, is a comment containing quotes for context — and to solve what you are describing, you would require the entire thread to be contained within the comment, which would still require scrolling. Neither option really addresses your complaint. Imo, atomic comments come the closest, as the scope is kept restricted per thread.

You could have support for this thing in the board’s software, but I don’t think it’s common. So normally, where a post will have at least a header, sometimes also a footer, multiple posts means duplicated data on screen. Pretty minor though.

Support for what? I’m not entirely sure what you are referring to with this section.

I think it fragments the workflow a bit because normally you can just quote a block and easily interject your replies + add more quote syntax. If it were multiple posts you’d need to repeat certain steps each time. Personally I want to minimize switches between keyboard and mouse. On mobile it’s more even.

That’s a fair point. Replies do sometimes rely on fragments of information from the entire post, but, even still, one could still just contain that within an atomic reply, but yeah, it would need to be repeated for each part. Personally I’m not bothered by the increase in actions. Generally, one isn’t commenting in a large enough volume for that sort of efficiency concern to really matter, imo.

Five Guys have better service that is free

It wasn’t free — they were charging money for it:

Jetflicks, which charged $9.99 per month for the streaming service