No one is pretending anything, and no one is claiming these laws aren’t specifically targeting trans people, of course they are. What they are claiming is that the same law would apply to what is being depicted in the photo, which is true.

lol I would open every port on my router and route them all to wireguard before I would ever consider doing this

I use Nextcloud with Nginx Proxy Manager and just use NPM to handle the reverse proxy, nothing in Nextcloud other than adding the domain to the config so it’s trusted.

I use Plex instead of Jellyfin, but I stream it through NPM with no issues. I can’t speak to the tunnel though, I prefer a simple wireguard tunnel for anything external so I’ve never tried it.

Edit: unless that’s what you mean by tunnel, I was assuming you meant traefik or tailscale or one of the other solutions I see posted more often, but I think one or both of those use wireguard under the hood.

The issue is that the docker container will still be running as the LXC’s root user even if you specify another user to run as in the docker compose file or run command, and if root doesn’t have access to the dir the container will always fail.

The solution to this is to remap the unprivileged LXC’s root user to a user on the Proxmox host that has access to the dir using the LXC’s config file, mount the container’s filesystem using pct mount, and then chown everything in the container owned by the default root mapped user (100000).

These are the commands I use for this:

find /var/lib/lxc/xxx/rootfs -user 100000 -type f -exec chown username {} +;
find /var/lib/lxc/xxx/rootfs -user 100000 -type d -exec chown username {} +;
find /var/lib/lxc/xxx/rootfs -user 100000 -type l -exec chown -h username {} +;
find /var/lib/lxc/xxx/rootfs -group 100000 -type f -exec chown :username {} +;
find /var/lib/lxc/xxx/rootfs -group 100000 -type d -exec chown :username {} +;
find /var/lib/lxc/xxx/rootfs -group 100000 -type l -exec chown -h :username {} +

(Replace xxx with the LXC number and username with the host user/UID)

If group permissions are involved you’ll also have to map those groups in the LXC config, create them in the LXC with the corresponding GIDs, add them as supplementary groups to the root user in the LXC, and then add them to the docker compose yaml using group_add.

It’s super confusing and annoying but this is the workflow I’m using now to avoid having to have any resources tied up in VMs unnecessarily.

I’ve been doing this for at least a decade now and the drives are just as reliable as if you bought them normally. The only downside is having to block one of the pins on the SATA connector with kapton tape for it to work.

I like the workflow of having a DNS record on my network for *.mydomain.com pointing to Nginx Proxy Manager, and just needing to plug in a subdomain, IP, and port whenever I spin up something new for super easy SSL. All you need is one let’s encrypt wildcard cert for your domain and you’re all set.

IIRC from running into this same issue, this won’t work the way you have the volume bind mounts set up because it will treat the movies and downloads directories as two separate file systems, which hardlinks don’t work across.

If you bind mounted /media/HDD1:/media/HDD1 it should work, but then the container will have access to the entire drive. You might be able to get around that by running the container as a different user and only giving that user access to those two directories, but docker is also really inconsistent about that in my experience.

If you want Proxmox to dynamically allocate resources you’ll need to use LXCs, not VMs. I don’t use VMs at all anymore for this exact reason.

That I’m not sure of. My proxmox host is headless and none of my containers have a GUI so I haven’t tried.

You can also pass the GPU to multiple LXCs that will share it vs it being tied to a single VM. I use VMs as little as possible in Proxmox these days.

Visual discomfort because it looks like an slightly older app? What kind of issue is that???

You’ve met an iOS user.

Absolutely, if it was anything I needed or even really wanted to be sure was reliably available I’d never put it on a free VPS.

Now, something trivial like this that just requires installing wireguard and nginx, copying over some configs, and changing a DNS record? Hard to beat free.

I know everyone loves to shit on Oracle, but a free-tier Oracle VPS would solve this.

Or if you want something decent pay for a cheap VPS.

I mean that’s not inherently bad, what you do with that data could be though.

By running NPM in an unprivileged LXC without docker or podman. I’m surprised to hear that’s been an issue with podman for so long though.

If you are high you are impaired, and the feeling of being high might be hard to define, but it’s not difficult to recognize when you’re starting to feel it. What are you arguing against?

All you have to do to avoid this is just not open any ports except one for something like wireguard, and only access your network using it externally, and you will never have this problem.

I guess I’m extremely paranoid then, my home IP doesn’t change much and I just expose the port only to it from Oracle’s site. I rarely touch mine though.

Have you tried mapping it to a different port?

deleted by creator