I’ve been working solo on this project for the past year

The commit history is three weeks old, so that becomes difficult to believe.

deleted by creator

Safer with bs=4M on older flash.

Davx5 is just a bridge between calendar apps and dav providers. One calendar has this function built-in. Any issues showing content on the right time zone, etc would be in the client, not davx5.

OK, I get where you’re coming from.

This has been an issue for a very long time, partly caused by the lie we were all told, that the internet would free us. And we were OK with Google et al taking the helm.

Clearer?

Not really. Most of your statements have no relative reference, so they are really ambiguous. Example:

The community sometimes talks about sovereignty like it’s binary, but it’s a dial,

Great start! And I agree, we should welcome all shades of self-hosting, whether that’s someone just starting or a hardcore digital off-grid self-hoster.

But then comes the next part:

and we should be thinking harder about who’s turning it.

What does this mean? Are you saying we all have different tolerances and preferences for how much we value digital sovereignty? Are you suggesting that we are all at the mercy of the Powers that Be and that they “turn the dial”?

One thing I think would have helped would have been to indicate that your topic is AI-focused. For me, I went into the reading with the impression that you were talking about self-hosting in general.

Well, from my second reading of your post, you make a number of observations, but it’s not clear whether you support AI, or whether you support self-hosting.

Generally, most posts have a point to make or an opinion on a topic, some will summarize their ideas into a cogent question for discussion.

None of that is present here. You give what amounts to be an opinion, but counter it with “on the other hand” and we dont end up knowing what you actually think.

What is your actual message, here?

Yeah, that tracks fine.

It’s the recent one where a person told this group about their app, asked if anyone was interested in beta testing in exchange for full paid app access for free.

I don’t think that person posted in bad faith. But the crowd here acted like an absolute mob, calling him names, telling him to f*ck off, etc.

That was handled poorly. And I don’t think your rule would address the abuse part, regardless of how much “community interaction” you made a requirement.

That’s my problem with these new guidelines, they don’t address the venom people have towards folks for not much justifiable reason. You can’t just bend to what the crowd wants, sometimes they want blood.

If you’re not pushing your paywalled stuff

I’m not, but that shouldn’t be part of this conversation.

Where is the line for what you’re saying is “paywalled stuff”?

If someone promotes Plex, for example? Not allowed? What about deluxe features of homeassistant, which is fully open source, but paid?

Promotion of a software product? Not sure I understand where you’re coming from.

And now I’m doubly confused why you dont get the Plex reference.

Unless they are a closed source dev looking to promote.

I’m not, I swear!

Jokes aside, your example of Plex is a good one to illustrate that we’re not all at the same ratio of FOSS use, some of us have more or less of each.

At which time as it becomes a problem it can be evaluated.

This is functionally what I’m concerned about, and your comment above addresses it. Thanks.

Thank for the clarification.

If you think this is about what I want, you haven’t been reading any of my comments.

I have read them, all of them. Your wording “I think it makes sense to…” suggests you’re making a decision. It seems based on community input, but is nonetheless still your decision. As it should be.

I don’t really have an opinion on the 10% rule, I don’t think anyone can help but make that an arbitrary number.

I do, however, think it’s a mistake to lean heavily toward favoring FOSS here because, as I mentioned, there is nothing preventing FOSS applications from making money. Further, it is very difficult to find software that is 100% FOSS through and through.

Ultimately, the line of what is FOSS and what isn’t is what will become a problem.

I do think it makes sense to include an exception for 100% free/libre open source projects.

Here we go again.

Both libre projects and free projects can make money via donation, patreon, or other business models. Allowing them a “vibe check” exception and not closed source or anything in between is propagating this notion that money and open source are mutually exclusive.

I appreciate the effort to establish some rules, but this is further entrenching the Lemmy self-hosting community in a mode where it’s a FOSS-only space, which is both uninclusive and inaccurate.

If what you want is a FOSS-only space for self-hosting, I’d like to know that so I can find or start a similar community where ppl who do use closed source tools can post questions.

Why? Nothing about self-hosted is FOSS-only. There’s a big overlap, to be sure, but this knee-jerk reaction to paid and closed-source apps doesn’t help anyone.

Page faults are memory-related and random reboots are either CPU or memory related, typically. I would run a memtest.

That makes sense. I use NFS, so there are other controls for security because “offsite” is another building on my property, but still in the same pool of subnets…

What’s the rationale for this? Genuinely curious.

They are set-and-forget, and no network engineers like tuning WiFi. I think the value is in not having to touch it.