The community has been making Winamp clones for as long as Winamp has existed. XMMS appeared the same year as Winamp, in 1997. Audacious is still around and still has a mode where it uses Winamp skins.

The thing about Winamp is that it had its time in the spotlight for a few years and then everybody moved on to the new types of media libraries like foobar2000. Today it’s just a museum piece.

This was predicted back when they first announced it… what do you know, it was correct.

Exactly.

The reason most companies decide to contribute to FOSS is because it’s a lot more efficient to fix bugs and add/influence features upstream than to do it at your end of the code independently of everybody else.

I use whatever online storage service I want because you can add your own encryption layer so you only sync encrypted files. rclone supports lots of services and will also encrypt files for you.

You don’t have to install drivers or CUPS on client devices. Linux and Android support IPP out of the box. Just make sure your CUPS on the server is multicasting to the LAN.

You may need to install Avahi on the server if it’s not already (that’s what does the actual multicasting). The printer(s) should then auto magically appear in the print dialogs on apps on Linux clients and in the printer service on Android.

On Linux it may take a few seconds to appear after you turn it on and may not appear when it’s off. On Android it shows up anyways as long as the CUPS server is on.

From what I understand OP’s images aren’t the same image, just very similar.

Any PC can do that, it’s called “status after power off” or something like that.

It’s impossible to tell how meaningful Backblaze’s numbers are because we don’t know the global failure rate for each model they test, so we can’t calculate the statistical significance. Also there are other factors involved like the age of the drives and the type of workload they were used for.

buying more reliable devices can definitely save you time and headache in the future by having to deal with failures less frequently.

That’s a recipe for sorrow. Don’t waste time on “reliability” research, just plan for failure. All HDDs fail. Assume they will and backup or replicate your data.

Any difference you personally experience between the three big brands is meaningless. For any failed HDD you have there’s going to be another person who swears by them and has had five of them running for 10 years without a hitch.

But whatever’s cheaper in your area and stop worrying. Your reliability should be assured by backups anyway not by betting on a single drive. Any drive can fail.

For home setup you don’t care because you should have either redundancy or backup (preferably both).

So that typically means buying the cheapest HDD that’s new and from one of the established brands (Seagate, Western Digital, Toshiba) that’s in the correct size for your needs, and you can afford to buy it at least twice (for the aforementioned backups or redundancy), or even thrice, and replace as soon as needed.

In other words there’s no need to speculate on how long an HDD will last, you simply replace it when needed.

Please also note that HDDs over 10 TB are starting to get increasingly replaced with enterprise models which run hotter and make more noise.

And what do you do when Firefox deprecates v2 too?

That sounds a bit suspicious.

This is not a new problem, .internal is just a new gimmick but people have been using .lan and whatnot for ages.

Certificates are a web-specific problem but there’s more to intranets than HTTPS. All devices on my network get a .lan name but not all of them run a web app.

As opposed to what, the domain certificate? Which can’t be air-gapped because it needs to be used by services and reverse proxies.

If you mean properly signed certificates (as opposed to self-signed) you’ll need a domain name, and you’ll need your LAN DNS server to resolve a made-up subdomain like lan.domain.com. With that you can get a wildcard Let’s Encrypt certificate for *.lan.domain.com and all your https://whatever.lan.domain.com URLs will work normally in any browser (for as long as you’re on the LAN).

Then why do they offer a separate, distinct DDoS mitigation feature on the enterprise plans? And did you notice they call them “mitigation” and not “protection”? 🙂

Look at the description of each one, the free one “stops illegitimate traffic at the edge”. Meaning they’ll serve from cache, it’s not getting through to your actual site. You can get caching from any CDN service, it doesn’t have to be CF. All CDN services are distributed and will try to serve for as long as possible because their whole purpose is to deal with traffic spikes.

And if you want to know for how long CF (or any service) will serve from cache and how far they’ll go for an account (especially a free account), you want to check the terms of service not the plans. The plans are made to sell to you, the fine print is in the terms.

Anyway, I really don’t understand people’s obsession with DDoS, particularly self-hosting people. The chances of their little website ever being the target of a DDoS are astronomical. Many of them don’t take proper backups, and don’t worry about theft or fire or electric spikes, which are far more likely, but go frantic when they hear about features they’ll never use.

Use your common sense. They’re not going to expend any significant resources to keep up a free website.

They have a small capacity available for mitigating DoS for free accounts together, while resources last. If you happen to fit in that capacity at any given time that’s nice, if you don’t, you go down.

If anything ever happens that involves [the lack of] DNSSEC or CAA you’ll have to buy another domain because the old one will be on every block list.

As a workaround for Windows you can sync files to a Linux machine with SyncThing for example, and use Borg there.

Make your website all static files (if you can) and host on a CDN like Bunny.net. It’s $1/month and your website might actually be able to get through some large traffic spikes. It won’t work against a targeted sustained DDoS but like the other comments said that’s not likely to happen.