• 2 Posts
  • 29 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 8th, 2023

help-circle



  • Hmm, I bought a used laptop on which I wanted to tinker with linux and docker services, but I kinda wanted to separate the NAS into a separate advice to avoid the “all eggs in one basket” situation (also I can’t really connect that many hard drives to it unless I buy some separately charged USB disk hubs or something, if those exist and are any good?)

    However I do see the merit in your suggestion considering some of the suggestions here are driving me into temptation to get a $500 NAS and that’s even without the drives… that’s practically more than what my desktop is worth atm.


  • Could be a regional thing but Synology HDDs are around 30% more expensive than ‘normal’ WD/Seagate/Toshiba that I’m seeing at first glance. Maybe it does make it up for quality and longevity but afaik HDDs are pretty durable if they are maintained well, and I imagine them being in RAID1 should be good enough security measure?

    Considering the price of the diskstation itself it’s all quickly adding up to a price of a standalone PC so i’m trying to keep it simple since it’s for a relatively low performance environment.


  • gummibando@mastodon.social
    Sorry, with ‘docker drives’ I meant ‘docker volumes or bind mounts’. I dont have a lot of experience with it yet so I’m not sure if I’m going to run into problems by mapping them directly to a NAS, or if I should have local copies of data and then rsync / syncthing them into the NAS. I heard you can theoretically even run docker on the NAS but not sure if that’s a good idea in terms of its longevity or performance.

    Is the list of “approved HDDs” just a marketing/support thing or does it actually affect performance?

    Thanks for the answers! The DS2xx series looks like something I could start with. DS223 is a bit cheaper and has 3 USB ports so that could be useful, I’d guess I don’t need to focus on performance since it’s mostly just for personal data storage and not some intensive professional work.












  • Someone else is imprinting their definition

    I mean yeah, that’s how words work? AA has the meaning because a bunch of people imprinted their meaning on it.

    Open source has a meaning because a bunch of people imprinted their meaning on it too, it has no relevance to actual words “open” or “source”. The issue is that other people are now imprinting their own meaning on it and muddling it instead of following the existing meaning or coming up with their own terminology.


  • I think the only thing we’re missing is the official OSI definition for open-source-for-reading-but-not-modifying so we don’t use the same name as for the open-source-for-reading-and-modifying code? The issue seems that we don’t have OSI-defined names for both, just for one, so people started misusing it unknowingly while the businesses misused it maliciously.



  • Muddying the waters is the oldest trick in the books, big corporations have even started doing it with “indie” games - Dave the Diver is stylized and marketed as an indie game despite being developed by a division of a multi-billion company Nexon.

    I definitely have an issue with it as well, it’s really hard to say whether something is actually FOSS nowadays or not, and whether it can be taken away or acquired by someone else down the line. That could be my fault as well since I never bothered to learn about the licenses beyond what MIT / Apache2 are, and even those I understand superficially.

    There should absolutely be more pushback for things like these though.