Linux’s “security through obscurity”

I lost braincells reading this. The entire point of open source software is to have it visible and auditable, aka the exact opposite of security through obscurity.

If you want to bash OS’s for relying on STO, go after iOS and Windows. Those OS’s, being closed source, are the ones relying on it

Keep in mind that the rate of errors caught by AI will not be consistent. It will drop off over time.

While I’m no fan of AI, that has nothing to do with it. Adding AI to error detection suites is (mostly) fine so long as you don’t remove more tradional methods like code review, manually set up unit tests, and properly reviewing each failed test instead of just letting the AI slop in a patch.

My point is that any test you add to an existing codebase is going to catch a decent number of issues at first, then over time it will drop off as pre-existing issues get resolved. Then you’ll be left with the lower rate of new issues from updates.

AI isn’t a silver bullet. It (sometimes) is another tool in the toolbox.

Good writeup, I’m definitely saving this for reference

Tbh, that doesn’t sound different from any other antivirus software

I believe that’s due to whatever ad services the creators use

It’s based on IP, so if you use a VPN when you download episodes the commercials will be based on where your server is located

My point is that the Lemmy devs wouldn’t be getting nearly as much criticism if they didn’t push shitty opinions

allow me to donate a set, reoccurring, monthly sum. I.e $20, 40, 60, etc, to 1 service

Just a note to add, a yearly donation schedule can also be good, as it can reduce payment transfer fees. But on the flip side, if a donatoe wants to stop donating, it’s easier for a yearly payment to fly under the radar.

I think the best option is to offer both yearly and monthly options when possible

The Lemmy devs could also just stop ignoring the abuses that Russia and China commit simply because they’re rivals of the US and publicly apologize.

I get not liking the US, but the presence of a bad guy doesn’t mean everyone against them is a good guy. All the main world powers can just suck.

Yep. For folders where I want access quick access to everything in the folder, SyncThing is best.

Starting to dabble with KDE Connect for one-off file transfers where SyncThing is overkill

Instead of that, you could just search online and go through examples on how to use the API’s in question. Then you actually learn and gain experience in that task, which you wouldn’t get if you have AI get you 95% of the answer from the start.

While having an AI code something you’re unfamiliar with is more efficient for that specific task, over time it’s less effecient and detrimental to you as a programmer. Think of it like getting a teacher’s edition of a textbook for a class. You can answer questions more quickly by looking up the answer in the back of the book and copying it down. Sure, you absorb the answer a bit, but not nearly as much as if you worked through it yourself.

Now think about the differences between junior and senior dev jobs. What’s the primary difference? It’s experience. If you’re a junior dev that has AI do all the hard parts for you, then you’ll gain experience slower than another junior dev that does everything on their own. In the future, that other junior dev is more likely to get the lucrative senior dev promotion than you because they’ve built up more experience.

It can help fill in with weaknesses that slow developers down.

No no no no…

You don’t want AI replacing devs where they’re “weak”. That is literally the worst thing you can do with AI. All that does is mean the devs aren’t qualified to assess and debug those portions of code. The solution to devs being “weak” in an area is for them to gain experience doing that task.

Some programmers use AI to make boilerplate code they can easily check to save time without much issue. That’s about the only thing you can use AI for in software development with little risk without taking up excessive time checking/fixing what it shits out.

Just keep in mind that the rebuild time for RAID 6 grows with drive size. A 6TB drive takes 1.4 days to rebuild, an 8TB drive takes 1.8 days, and a 10TB drive takes 2.3 days. So when a drive fails you might have a lot of downtime.

Here’s the calculator I used in case anyone asks or has a more accurate option to recommend: https://cal67.calculator.city/raid-rebuild-time-calculator.html

Also, apparently this is a best case scenario. If you’re still having the server run you could see rebuild times up to 10x this.

That being said, it you stagger your drive life (aka add or prematurely replace 1 drive per year) you can further minimize risk of 2-3 drives going down all at the same time, so a yearly rebuild in the background shouldn’t be too bad