Sounds about right for Google.

Your VPS / ISP better have a good reason to "deplatform". If you're really worried, use two different ones.

Also, people have more problems with being "deplatformed" by Google, often with no reason given, and with no way to communicate with a human about the issue. Look it up. I'd be more worried about that.

DNS isn't a single point of failure. Nor is email when it comes to reception (that's what backup MXs are for). If you need redundancy when it comes to being able to fetch email, you can easily have the primary MX also forward to mailboxes on another host so you have two (or more) copies of everything. None of this is all that hard, and people have been doing it for ages. Give it a try :)

You'll find plenty of people telling you to not do it, but they mostly seem to think that others shouldn't do things because they can't.

The biggest problem with self-hosting email is deliverability, and it's easily handled by smarthosting through a reputable service, so anyone who says it can't be done hasn't really thought things through very much.

Here's a genuine question: is Proton Mail the least shitty of companies that provide email services?

I self-host email and will continue until I die. But for others who need a company to do this for them, is Proton Mail the least shitty of options? Does this change the evaluation? I'm genuinely curious about the opinion of others here.

Claiming that actual maintainers spend more than trivial amounts of time on "maintaining" endianness correctness, I think, is somewhat disrespectful to those maintainers.

Don't tell me to shut up. That's not very nice, no matter your justification. The open source world is definitely not do it yourself or pay, and everyone else needs to shut up. Again, it's more likely that you know this, but you want to be intentionally antagonistic.

You also neatly avoid discussing what I brought up. These things all make me think you're not participating in good faith.

You have it wrong. Rather than reuse parts of X11, like the compositors that support hardware that nobody will ever be paid to support, Wayland is trying to reinvent the wheel and replace X11, with support for only what's new and/or popular.

> However everyone demanding X11 is really demanding Wayland designers stop their work and go back to X11 - and none of them are paying for that.

Absolutely nobody is demanding that Wayland developers should stop their work and go back to working on X11. Nobody. That's a ridiculous, hyperbolic statement.

What some of us would like to see is Wayland not try to make everything either/or. But, just like systemd, things started with, "you can do both", then went to, "it's harder to do both, but you can", then to, "the old way is dead, so stop writing code that supports it", and eventually to, "let's completely rip out the old way of doing it because "maintenance" and everyone will be forced to use the new way". GNOME is already doing this, even though it's supposed to be open source, platform agnostic and portable.

The fact that you bring up paid work shows you're happy to accept idea that support for things is only worth what people will pay for it. Consider how that fits with corporatization, and consider how that fits with open source in general.

In other words, should all open source project be drivable by some corporation deciding to just throw money at something?

If you think about this for more than 30 seconds, you may finally understand why those of us who aren't fans of the corporatization of Linux and aren't fans of projects that don't interoperate and ultimately end up fragmenting the open source software world are not fans of the eventual consequences of projects like Wayland.

It's not "X11 is great and Wayland sucks" - it's "why is this project fragmenting things rather than interoperating, and why are people so eager to be led by corporations in to supporting corporate interests?"

The speaker didn't give any reasons, mind you, why big endian should die other than handwaving about how it means "more maintenance", and the responses to "can you give any examples of how it means "more maintenance" other than saying it?" were largely, "can you give proof it's not "more maintenance"?"

I feel the same happens with Wayland. People who don't understand its position have strong feelings in both directions, yet very little discussion is about the underlying rationale for it in the first place, about who benefits by marginalizing people with non-mainstream hardware and who benefits from forcing the software ecosystem down narrower paths.

X11 and Wayland really should coexist, at least for as long as it takes for Wayland to lose a majority of its major issues, yet Wayland designers didn't seem to think that'd be worthwhile. Some of the projects that're working on making them work together need more attention than they're getting.

I'm not sure, but I think nano11 is even more aggressive than tiny11builder's "tiny11coremaker.ps1":

https://github.com/ntdevlabs/nano11

It almost makes it seem like they want their memory to last five years, as though it's a feature.

GPUs are great if your workload can use them, but not so great for more general tasks. These are more appropriate to more traditional supercomputing tasks, as in they're not optimized for lower precision AI stuff, like NVIDIA GPUs are.

If I wanted to get fancy, I could even use the Amiga side to load and save programs from the A2232's 16K of memory...

I suppose if you're buying something for someone who is new to all of this, it might be worthwhile to have many things be RPi branded so if there are issues, there's only one party to worry about.

Sometimes we don't want to have to keep around a cheat sheet so we can have commands we're accustomed to, then we have the corresponding ones we need to know for a separate device.

The BSDs are much cleaner and more consistent. You can run the same OS on your desktop and your Arm machine. Tinkering is fine, but there's a time and a place for everything, and sometimes we just want to run stuff and tinker with what we're running, not necessarily with the underlying OS.

"Search is broken. If I search for wwvb watch, I get shown tons of watches which are definitely NOT WWVB."

"What browser are you using? Could you try Chrome?"

UEFI makes it so you can boot your Unix OS, like NetBSD, without needing to have specific bootblocks that are tailored to the given machine. You can move drives between Arm machines, too. Much simpler.