Awesome, good to hear. Just a reminder that I forgot when I sent that link: double-check the Tutorial, it might have slightly outdated information. But a few lessons I learned when setting it up:

Pangolin uses its own auth. You can use a OIDC provider if you like, but you have to set it up. I use TinyAuth in conjunction because I have so few users.

To bypass auth on Pangolin, you must disable it and it will appear "Unprotected". This helps with mobile apps, which don't know how to deal with third-party login screens, but it leaves the login screen of whatever server you're running (like Jellyfin) accessible by everyone. So something more hardened as your OIDC provider at the frontend help. Although lots of apps, again like Jellyfin, don't have native OIDC login.

The solution would be to route it with Private Resources, which are zero-trust connections. Great for a few people on your network, but it requires you setting up the Client app to access the Pangolin network. I've had issues with DNS on Android before, but your problems may vary.

If you have any more questions, let me know. I've been using Pangolin for only about a year, but I think I learned enough to help.

Sure, https://pimylifeup.com/pangolin-linux/

But I have to say, the Pangolin Docs are quite good as well: https://docs.pangolin.net/self-host/quick-install

I use Pangolin on a kinda cheap VPS on Hetzner (they're now a bit too pricey), and route my services through Site Connectors (Newt, it's called). Dealing with opening my firewall is a pain I don't wanna think about, but Pangolin creates a websocket and can do NAT traversal from the Site Connector, so no swiss-cheesing your firewall.

It's nice because you can contain different services with VLANs to further segment and protect your network, and each Site Connector can work for many services (if there's no firewall rules restricting it/VLANs) or you can put a Site Connector on each server individually, if segmentation is important to you.

God damn trucks. Fucking enormous ass trucks. And these stupid fucking vehicles are sold like hotcakes to everyone and their mother.

For something that uses immeasurable amounts of stolen data to be trained on and function, without credit or compensation, and breaks so many laws I can't list them, I think it's pretty unethical to use. Or something that burns immeasurable amounts of potable water and electricity to function at all, I think its pretty unethical. For something that artificially generates scarcity for chips we desperately need, I think it's unethical. For something that authoritarian governments are lapping up as a form of propaganda, disinformation, misinformation, surveillance, I think its pretty damn unethical. All so people can write an email 10 seconds faster, in a tone that's not yours, to be sent to a AI to answer that email. For the people who say "I think it can be used for good" or "it's just a tool!" What kind of tool sacrifices so much of which we take for granted? Are these things not important to you? Look at that list again! Fuck, look around, your silly chatbot is not changing the world in the way you want. Maybe you get some minor benefit from your chatbot, but the world shifts further to a dystopian shithole for your marginal gains.

Say you're in the desert and miraculously you found a glass of water, but it is filled with shit particles. Ya, it's a glass of water, but it's filled with shit. And you're out here thinking to yourself "hmm, there's water here, and I can drink it. So what if it's filled with shit? I can use it." #fuckai

Christ, Carlin died in 2008. If only he saw how infinitely stupider and more depraved western society has become since then.

Life is just good enough where people don't care enough, just brainwashed enough to believe they have a chance for they themselves to get rich, and just distracted enough to make them forget about the red white and blue dick that's jammed up their assholes even further.

I have successfully set up Synapse Matrix server twice before and it is still a ridiculous convoluted mess. Something like Conduit for Matrix might be better, but progress there is glacial.

I'm wondering if you can read or having memory issues, or blissfully ignoring everything I wrote. In no way did I say large vehicles are less safe for the person driving them. The problem is that they kill more people than they save around them. Read that again. So while you can feel snuggly safe in your ridiculous truck, know that cumulatively more fatalities are happening because vehicles keep getting bigger. Again, it just means you're only thinking of yourself. I'm done talking to a narcissist.

My guy, you vomited a bunch of AI slop and call that research, at the bottom of your text it says "Are you researching this for a legal or insurance case, looking into vehicle crash-test ratings for a new purchase, or exploring mechanical engineering concepts?". LMAO great research, dude.

Yes, I do have my facts in order, I studied this in university for urban planning. I find it laughable, and honestly expectable, that you're only concerned with motorists deaths. How carbrained. Even more so, that the pillar of your argument is based on physics, which you are ironically supporting my argument. Yes, vehicles are generally safer today than they were in the past (Tyndall) but the mass and shape of vehicles plays a critical role in whether pedestrians or cyclists are killed. "SUVs and light trucks are taller, heavier, and more rigid than cars, they pose an increased danger to occupants of cars and to pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorcyclists" (Hu et al.). Trucks and SUVs disenfranchise other drivers' safety, because they "...are much stiffer. They therefore absorb less of the force of the crash and transfer more to cars" (Hu et al.). To continue this argument, "occupants of vehicles colliding with any type of [SUVs and light trucks] were at higher risk of death compared with occupants colliding with cars" (Ossiander et al.).

More mass does not mean better, despite how safe you feel in your cage of steel, because "For each 1 million light trucks that replace cars, between 34 and 93 additional car occupants, pedestrians, bicyclists, or motorcyclists are killed per year... for each fatal crash that occupants of large vehicles avoid, at least 4.3 additional fatal crashes involving others occur" (White). Larger vehicles yield higher fatalities: "Between 2000 and 2019, I estimate that replacing the growth in Sport Utility Vehicles with cars would have averted 1,100 pedestrian deaths. I find no evidence that the shift towards larger vehicles improved aggregate motorist safety... If all light trucks were replaced with cars, over 8,000 pedestrian deaths would have been averted between 2000 and 2019. Vehicle body types appear to be an important determinant of pedestrian deaths in the aggregate" (Tyndall). If you think it's okay to normalize and accept the enormity of SUVs and trucks at the expense of human beings taking other forms of transportation around you, then you have a problem far deeper than I can provide with sources. That's between you and your maker.

How about next comment, skip the AI slop and do some actual research besides showing me some hurled out elementary physics I already know about.

Sources

Hu, Wen, et al. “The Association Between Passenger-vehicle Front-end Profiles and Pedestrian Injury Severity in Motor Vehicle Crashes.” Journal of Safety Research, vol. 90, June 2024, pp. 115–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2024.06.007.

Ossiander, Eric M., et al. “Crash Fatality and Vehicle Incompatibility in Collisions Between Cars and Light Trucks or Vans.” Injury Prevention, vol. 20, no. 6, May 2014, pp. 373–79. https://doi.org/10.1136/injuryprev-2013-041146.

Tyndall, Justin. “Pedestrian Deaths and Large Vehicles.” Economics of Transportation, vol. 26–27, June 2021, p. 100219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecotra.2021.100219.

White, Michelle J. “The ‘Arms Race’ on American Roads: The Effect of Sport Utility Vehicles And Pickup Trucks on Traffic Safety.” The Journal of Law and Economics, vol. 47, no. 2, Oct. 2004, pp. 333–55. https://doi.org/10.1086/422979.

My reaction comes from studies done on vehicle safety and the economics behind them. You reacted by saying "I feel safer" and getting all emotional because you're trying to justify your purchase. And everyone else is unhinged. Right.

Also, your reaction of "cool story" disqualifies you from any actual meaningful participation in this. Truth is, larger vehicles means more deaths and accidents. I provided comments you can easily verify with countless studies but you're not here for that.

Seems like you have a it's-all-about-me complex. "I drive around slowly in my truck and be calm, why can't you?1!"

The problem with these fucking god awful abominations driving the road is their ever increasing mass and dimensions. Every year, companies somehow inflate more and more into personal vehicle sizes, and the fragile, tiny dick men buy these things to shore up their desperate and delicate egos. The trend of larger vehicles driving around incentivized a "safety" (more like a capitalism) war, wherein other vehicles had to increase size so that they didn't turn into a new form of powder during an accident. Now, a lot of people buy giant vehicles, as well as little old grandma getting two bags of groceries in a 6000lb Chevy Suburban behemoth. They keep adding sensors and cameras, because it's borderline impossible to see without them. Do you see the problem here?

I say capitalism war because the total profit per vehicle is higher because the selling price is significantly higher. A company makes more absolute profit on a $60,000 mega SUV than a $25,000 sedan, even if the margin percentage is comparable.

You can continue living in your "feminized" truck and justifying dangerous and increasingly fortified vehicles, or you can come down to earth and stop equating people's choice to make the road actually safer by bucking the trend of economies of scale with "dying like a man". More of these kei trucks on the road means the road is safer. It means your crumplezone on wheels is just for looks and not safety anymore. The pathway for safer roads is not to knuckle down and continue indulging in these ludicrously sized vehicles.