TS is a lot easier to set up than WG and does not require a publicly accessible IP address nor any public whatsoever. It’s not really comparable to setting WG up yourself; especially w.r.t. security.

It’s a central server (that you could actually self-host publicly if you wanted to) whose purpose it is to facilitate P2P connections between your devices.

If you were outside your home network and wanted to connect to your server from your laptop, both devices would be connected to the TS server independently. When attempting to send IP packets between the devices, the initiating device (i.e. your laptop) would establish a direct wireguard tunnel to the receiving device. This process is managed by the individual devices while the central TS service merely facilitates communication between the devices for the purpose of establishing this connection.

If you’re worried about that, I can recommend a service like Tailscale which does not require permanently open ports to the outside world, offering quite a bit more security than an exposed traditional VPN server.

Yes, yes they will. If you’re the sole user, they’d identify you from your behaviour anyways.

I don’t think internet proxy won’t help very much w.r.t. privacy but it will make you a lot more susceptible to being blocked.

Thank you for your thoughts, I really enjoyed reading them :)

This reads like a phrase from Half as Interesting.

I don’t like the Piped bot at all.

What should be posted on the internet should be the canonical source of some content, not a proxy for it. If users prefer a proxy, they should configure their clients to redirect to the proxy. Piped instances come and go and the entire project is at the mercy of Google tolerating it/not taking action against it, so it could be gone tomorrow.

I use piped myself. I have client-side configurations which simply redirects all Youtube links to my piped instance. No need for any bots here.

This would better be done in the front-end rather than a comment bot.

That does not address the point made. It doesn’t matter whether it’s a complex hardware or software component in the stack; they will both fail.

Ah, indeed. No idea why it didn’t work yesterday.

Link already died?

engineers don’t like reinventing the wheel.

Engineers aren’t the ones to decide whether to reinvent the wheel or not.

I was in a similar situation as you. I pulled through and let me tell you: It did not get better :(

I managed to get good grades and such because I knew most of the core concepts already and had some luck in the intelligence lottery w.r.t the specific kinds of intelligence beneficial in my field which enabled me to learn the new parts really quite easily but if that’s not the case for you, YMMV.

If I was doing it again, I’d stop if possible (a degree was not strictly required in my situation but beneficial). Failing that, I’d find a way to make it not as stressful (i.e. fewer classes).

I do like the idea of using USB drives for storage, though…

I wholeheartedly don’t.

They are quite solid but be aware that the web UI is dog slow and the menus weirdly designed.

Well that depends on how you define malware ;)

You can say removed. Especially when literally referring to the word itself?

Not on lemmy.ml apparently…

That is just a specific type of drive failure and only certain software RAID solutions are able to even detect corruption through the use of checksums. Typical “dumb” RAID will happily pass on corrupted data returned by the drives.

RAID only serves to prevent downtime due to drive failure. If your system has very high uptime requirements and a drive just dropping out must not affect the availability of your system, that’s where you use RAID.

If you want to preserve data however, there are much greater hazards than drive failure: Ransomware, user error, machine failure (PSU blows up), facility failure (basement flooded) are all similarly likely. RAID protects against exactly none of those.

Proper backups do provide at least decent mitigation against most of these hazards in addition to failure of any one drive.

If love your data, you make backups of it.

With a handful of modern drives (<~10) and a restore time of 1 week, you can expect storage uptime of >99.68%. If you don’t need more than that, you don’t need RAID. I’d also argue that if you do indeed need more than that, you probably also need higher uptime in other components than the drives through redundant computers at which point the benefit of RAID in any one of those redundant computers diminishes.

Without any cold hard data, this isn’t worth discussing.

The problem is that it’s not just 15W; I merely used that as an example of how even just two “low power” devices can cause an effect that you can measure in euros rather than cents.