gooeyglob

Big Netbird fan, and they support a fully self hosted version.

Since you know Debian, Devuan is there to try it. Given how almost unavoidable systemd is nowadays I basically try all of Devuan, Artix, Void and the first one that works for the task at hand is the one I stick to :)

No, if you mean 192.168.0.0 - 192.168.255.255, that is a /16 192.168.0.0 - 192.168.0.255 is a /24 192.168.0.0 - 192.168.0.7 is a /29

I was a little glib in my initial response. You really don't want to start your definition in the middle of a subnet.

I would set it up so your first group of /29 would be 192.168.0.0 - 192.168.0.7

Second would be 192.168.0.8 - 192.168.0.15 (192.168.0.8/29)

Third would be 192.168.0.16 - 192.168.0.23 (192.168.0.16/29)

And so on.

The problem looks to be your subnet specification. /24 is 256 addresses. So for your 192.168.0.10/24 export, you're exposing it to 0.10 and the following 255 IPs.

The closest thing to what you want to achieve would be a /29, which would expose it to the given IP and the following 7 IPs.

The real benefit of PBS is it does not store the backup as just a 1:1 dump of the VM disk, it's incremental - if the VM you're backing up for say the 3rd or 4th or 20th time doesn't have much new or changed data, it's not a linearly increasing amount of storage on your backup server, the new backup is actually trivially small. This really helps you have longer backup retention if files aren't actually changing all that often.

I got tired of stressing about whether my backup host might be down when my primary Proxmox host dies, even if they're in different data centers - well, as far as I know anyway! Now I just use BackBlaze B2 storage for the PBS off-site backup (compatible with Amazon S3), albeit it's a little finnicky to set up and working 100%. Yes it's still 'just someone else's computer', but for the ~12 bucks it's costing me for almost 2TB of backup data I am not stressing about it.

Well aside from the obvious giveaways in the presentation format of the README.md, and .gitignore, the very first question of its FAQ is:

"You use LLMs? 🤯"

Yes. Heavily. Claude and GLM-5.2 wrote a lot of this repo.

"This report draws on a survey conducted online by Wakefield Research on behalf of GitHub from February 26, 2024 through March 18, 2024 among 2,000 non-student, enterprise respondents in the U.S., Brazil, India, and Germany who are not managers and work at companies with 1,000-plus employees."

I generally want to use smaller FOSS projects, and honestly dont care what tools enterprise companies are making their employees use. But I have college age children and know its being mandated there as well. Though it doesnt mean they have to use it in their own projects.

As was discussed in precious slop threads, these projects are fairly easy to identify when they get posted here, today. Sure in a year that wont be as easy, but its clear from the downvotes thrown at projects since this rule was proposed that many people here just dont want AI-written running in their self hosted systems.

Yes this is needed. Thank you for the proposal here.

I would suggest that this probably needs to be really explicit about any AI involvement, i.e. a minimum if AI is used in any capacity in the coding process, it should require the tag. And ideally an explanation if it was used in other parts of the process.

That last post that came up said they used AI 'for code review only'. In my mind even that deserves the tag, because these terms are so easy to work around. Someone can 'code up' the following:

#include <studio.h> int main(void) { printf("Program that does X thing"); }

(yes, I know the main arguments are not written correctly. You get the point)

and then have the AI reviewer 'fix' their code by doing all the actual work. A strict requirement for this tag, for any AI involvement in the creation of the code seems like the key. The code part is going to be where the security issues crop up, and where it's really important to know who or what is producing the code you're about to run on your home server.

I think we're fairly used to a world where people use templates for their websites, documentation, etc. AI use there bothers me less, but an honest disclaimer saying what the AI did would sure go a long way to reducing the hate comments. I think people will still drive-by downvote, but that can't (and IMO really shouldn't be) prevented. But without a rule, people aren't going to be honest.

The scary part is just how emboldened people feel nowadays to just entirely use an AI for all the coding, documentation, website, and then not even put their name on the project. These to me feel like borderline state actor trojan horses disguised as open-source projects.

Legitimate open source developers can spend years writing code to do something very sinplle but useful, and for them to be drowned out by a bunch of completely AI driven, slop posts really bothers me.

And your efforts are very appreciated! I hope there can be a rule to keep useful content while not creating a ton of burden on the mod(s).

The problem I have with this is it's the pornography argument. You know it's slop when you see it.

• Brand new account
• No 'about us' on the project website with any details about the devs, and the entire website feels like a template, at least created by if not wholly done by AI.
• Asking for donations in cryptocurrency. I actually have no problem with this, but its the part of the pattern. I dont want my e.g. VPN management tool code provided by someone who needs to be anonymous even in their project donations.
• Using MIT license to me means the product could (and probably would) turn commercial at any moment if it finds success. Yes these projects are free to start, but there could be a huge cost in terms of migration need down the road, if the developer alters the deal.
• Many projects (albeit not this one yet) respond to questions about whether they are using AI to reply with 'of course, English is not our first language'. To me thats just too easy to hide behind and I'm tired of seeing it. English is also not an AIs fist language.
• And of course as soon as you enumerate what makes it slop, they will train the AIs to make it harder to detect. It feels like such a losing battle.

I appreciate rule 7 being updated, but time will tell if all slop projects just learn to wriggle around these rules. It just leaves a bad taste. I've started losing trust in any project I find on here, especially when its posted in the above manner.

Replaced my third system with artix and could not be happier.

I'm not sure I really understand your use case, but OwnCloud and OpenCloud offer fewer features than Nextcloud and are mostly about file sharing.

Other things you could consider: pydio cells, or Copy party (very simple and more just cloud storage, no syncing).