[–] 1 point 3 hours ago

Parents are liable for the actions of their children to a certain age.

First off, a technicality: At least in the jurisdictions I'm familiar with, "parents are liable for the actions of their children" is a popular misconception. The full story is: Parents are liable for the actions of their children only if it can be proven that they neglected their duty to supervise their children.

Also, I doubt AI companies would forego the chance to offload responsibility for their creations. Nothing in the article suggests they'd want AI to be treated like their children, but more like an entity separate from them.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 4 points 1 day ago

    HP WiFi network printer owner here. It sits on my main network, but I've assigned it a fixed network IP (based on its MAC) and cut off internet access in my router. That seemed enough for me. I'm open to comments why that isn't true. ;)

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (2 children)

    Accurate, all of it. You've got it.

    Two more (nice) things:

    1. (Assuming a star-shaped setup with a server at the centre) If you happen to make changes on the phone and another client device simultaneously (meaning: there is a collision of versions, since both have changes to write), Syncthing normally creates a "conflicted copy". Whenever you see these files, you know that some changes couldn't be merged and need to manually untangle the changes. No biggy normally.
    2. Syncthing does support versioning, meaning: Your server can store several versions of the same database file. That way, if you happen to accidentally delete some entries from your DB, you can revert back to an earlier copy of the file.
  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago

    Since Syncthing and LocalSend were already mentioned - let's throw in Warpinator:

    • built by the Linux Mint team
    • has had an (inofficial) Android client for a while now
    • works well (although Syncthing is a lot more powerful and requires fewer clicks once it's set up)
  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

    Great questions, all of them! No, there need not be any "master file" - but there can be. ;) Let me lay it out for you.

    There are two possible models you can build with Syncthing:

    • a star-shaped client-server structure places the server at the centre of the network. The server is the central authority that always holds the "master file", i.e. the newest version of the file, and the clients receive it from there (or don't, if they're already up to date). This structure, mind you, does not require dedicated server hardware: if you, say, have a phone, a notebook and a desktop PC, you can also make your phone the "server", i.e. the only device that is connected to all the others and that "serves" everyone the newest version of your password DB.
    • a meshed peer-to-peer structure has no centre - just a number of clients that are connected to all other clients. In this network, whichever device has the "newest" version of the file is the device that distributes this newest copy to all connected peers.

    Which model you go for depends on how many devices you're planning to hook up. If you only need to keep two devices in sync (e.g. your phone and your notebook), the client-server structure would probably be overkill, and actually Syncthing is typically deployed in serverless peer-to-peer scenarios.

    However, if you have a lot of devices to sync, it may be more efficient to go with the client-server setup. Example time to make this more transparent!

    Let's say you go with the p2p structure because you only have a phone and a notebook hooked up to Syncthing. You configure:

    • on the phone: share a folder with the notebook!
    • on the notebook: share a folder with the phone!

    But now you want to add another device, e.g. a desktop PC. Now you need to

    • add the PC to the phone, and add the share
    • add the PC to the notebook, and add the share
    • add the phone and the notebook to the PC, and add the share

    Otherwise you end up with a partial mesh, i.e. not every device immediately writes its changes to all others.

    If you now add a fourth device that also needs to receive the share, you already have to make changes on four devices. And so on and so on. The more devices you add, the more work you need to put in.


    TL;DR:

    Syncthing can work without a "master file". It can do peer-to-peer shares and work without a server. However, the more devices you need to share to, the more efficient a star-shaped / server-like architecture will become. This, however, does not require dedicated server hardware; you just decide that one of the devices will fulfil the role of the server by hooking all client devices up to it.


    One last, minor correction: Syncthing only lets you share folders, not files. So you'd create a "KeePass" folder, toss your DB in there and share the folder to the receiving devices.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

    Not just that. If you assume an LLM has agency, you - the company making it - can conveniently waive all responsibility for its "actions". "We didn't cause this. The AI chose do to it." This may become increasingly relevant the more idiots deciders allow these systems to access, if not entirely control vital systems. Think: power grid, water supplies, food production and related logistics, communications, military applications.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  •  

    Howdy self-hosters!

    I've got a huge pile of eBooks flying around here: poetry, scientific literature, magazines, comics, teaching materials, RPG rule books - it's a wildly mixed bag. I'm still looking for a self-hosted solution to make it more accessible and get an overview of what I actually have. (Calibre looks promising!)

    My question here is not about software, though, but about organisation at the filesystem level: what folder and file name structure have you established for your eBooks? Do you just dump everything into one single folder and let the software do the rest? Do you create sections by genre ("Crime", "Fantasy", "Young adult", like the libraries do it) or application (job-related, hobby-related, cooking, ...)? Does it matter at all?

     

    Hi selfhosters,

    I'm considering improving the security of my homelab/server setup and I'd love to hear some more experienced opinions on my plans.

    Like most self-hosters, I started out with a single-server setup: I cobbled together some old hardware, slapped on a NAS-style OS, bolted on Docker and started experimenting. As things go, my setup has grown a lot over the years. I'm running a lot on that machine - NAS capability, local DNS via pihole, a Wireguard VPN endpoint (so I can tunnel into the LAN from outside), many private services (accessible only from inside the LAN), but also some public ones accessible from the open web.

    Although I've tried to do my homework in terms of security (various hardening measures for SSH and Docker, reverse proxy, proper SSL termination for everything), I realise I've put a lot of eggs in that one basket and I might want to introduce some network segmentation.

    I don't think I'm ready for getting a hardware firewall or a router/switch capable of VLANs just yet. What I'm considering, though, is putting my services available from the open internet on a separate server inside my network - a little Pi 5 I've still got lying around. My idea is that if a container on that is breached and if an attacker manages to escape the container to gain root access, compromise would be limited to the few of publicly available services I have on the Pi, thus limiting blast radius. If combined with (software) firewall rules that make the Pi a 'pariah node' (dropping all incoming connection efforts), lateral movement to other devices on the network could be contained.

    An alternative would be to finally make the move to Proxmox. Everything would still be running on one physical machine, but I'd create several VMs: there would be one for private, one for publicly available services, and I'd firewall the latter off rigorously so it cannot connect to anything else.

    I'd like your opinion on these plans. Which one would you recommend? Are they both sound, or is there anything I haven't considered? Are there other (easy, non-hardware intense) things I could do to improve security even more?

    view more: next ›