Oh, how I long to be a tram driver taking part in the annual tram drivers competition! Oh, how I dream of public transit!
antheraeavx
joined 2 weeks ago
and the incredible lung capacity of wolves
Yes! It has always been a story about aerobic exercise and the importance of having a good VO2 Max. So you can use it to... *checks notes* destroy housing, I guess
Mounts and ports would also be in the compose files. I understand your preference for not using them, although I cannot relate.
That answers my question, though. It is a set-up that doesn't use docker compose, got it. Thanks for elaborating.
You can run rootless Podman with Portainer, I do too. Or used to, before ditching Portainer.
Can you elaborate on the ways a home lab is less secure if it runs a container management GUI? I'm open to learning more about it. What additional permissions does a GUI inherently require?
Most companies I worked at used OpenShift in production, and I do not think it was considered an attack vector more than any other components of the ecosystem were. I would be surprised if this was a major factor when it came to security incidents.
I don't think that container privilege escalation vulnerabilities are correlated to the use of a GUI. To me, it is not a significant (or otherwise unique) risk. Even less so when we're talking about a home lab that is only accessible via a VPN.
Now, is it unnecessary? Sure, but then so is running Jellyfin or lighting a scented candle.
Every day we stray further from god's light.
Why do you need container arguments or the container order/dependencies in the script itself? Is this a set-up that doesn't use compose files? Genuine question/curiosity. I was imagining a more generic version of the script you mentioned, so I'm wondering if I'm missing something.
Saw quite a few similar comments under the original post. Enjoying user interfaces is not equivalent to being tech-illiterate. Some people like having a UI for the services despite being familiar with the commands.
Yes, I can do docker container ls, but I like looking at a dashboard. Even better if I can apply different themes to it.
I'm working on doing the same for my set-up, so that's encouraging! I like having a visual dashboard for my services, and Arcane seems like a good replacement.
I agree that this is not out of the ordinary for Exxon.
Available documents show a discrepancy between what ExxonMobil’s scientists and executives discussed about climate change privately and in academic circles and what it presented to the general public.
This excerpt from one of the studies you posted shows that they were certainly not publicly vocal about it, though.
That’s not decades of time.
They did manufacture doubt about the scientific consensus, they did fund entities advancing climate denialism, they did lobby against regulatory measures. That is decades of time. Publishing climate change papers in the 70s does not absolve them of the crime of covering up the same information obtained through those papers.
The full report is available for download.
The analysis highlights the role of human-induced climate change. This illustration of the potential factors is included:
Quoting the Conclusions section:
Until emissions from fossil fuels are brought to net zero globally, this risk [of potentially catastrophic geohazards] will continue to grow.
This event shows that limits to adaptation are already being reached and transformative actions are needed at local and global levels to avert, minimize and address losses and damages.
Smoke and mirrors. This is representative of Exxon's general strategy. There is a partial admission of the dangers of climate warming, followed by an absolute refusal to change trajectory. This has not changed, and as long as capital depends on it, it never will.
The headline is not necessarily misleading. It paints an incomplete picture, though. These paragraphs in the article are more relevant (to me) than Exxon's immaterial admissions concerning climate change:
ExxonMobil’s Energy Outlook typically shows strong demand for oil and natural gas for decades into the future even as the world attempts to reduce emissions.
“We are seeing clear signs that coal is sticking longer from an energy security and other perspectives, specifically in parts of Asia-Pacific, China, and others,” Joshi said.
In Exxon's Global Executive Summary, mentioned in the article, coal use is predicted to decrease by 30% by 2050 to be replaced by renewables and natural gas. This is, at best, replacing fossil fuels with fossil fuels.
The mention of including fewer emission-reduction technologies and fewer CCS projections was also interesting:
Other changes in ExxonMobil’s outlook include fewer emission-reduction technologies. Projections for carbon capture and storage, and use of low-carbon hydrogen, dropped by about one-third from last year.
It makes me believe there is no more budget for putting on an overshoot-and-return charade to justify our reliance on fossil fuels. None of this is surprising or remarkable, though. This is not the downfall of Exxon, as the headline might have you believe, this is still business as usual.
Have you found it to be reliable? Online discussions around e-mail servers point to potential deliverability issues, so I was wondering about your experience with it.
Have a home server, and I've been considering self-hosting my e-mail. At least as an experiment, if it turns out to be inconsistent.
view more: next ›
AI is an easy scapegoat when you don't want to take accountability for your actions. I'm not questioning these elements potentially playing a role in this particular situation. However, the US has also been bombing school children before the adoption of AI.