MathiasPius

I would argue that producing the complete written corpus on which they at least intend to train (even if some is still out of reach) cost literally everything to produce.

And the monetary cost doesn't even register when weighed against the blood, sweat and tears that went into capturing the authentic experiences of real human beings, whose honest expressions are now at least in some cases getting hoovered up, ingested, and then destroyed for all eternity, for fear that this specific work is the rounding error that might give an equally immoral competitor the edge in the bicycle-riding flamingo race that is currently consuming an absurd amount of the world's creativity and attention.

Because nobody ever mentions them by name, leaving all of us in the dark.

I really enjoy when it when someone injects a dose of "wacky" into something that is taken more or less for granted (Raft) to challenge the standard way of thinking about it.

This article flipped my understanding of split-brain or network partitions on its head: You don't actually have to have a majority to ensure progress, you just have to design your quorum selection criteria in such a way that no other partition believes they are authoritative, and these finite projection planes are an interesting way of proving that (with caveats).

You can pull another branch without switching first:

  git switch my-test-branch
  ...
  git pull origin main:main
  git rebase main

It sometimes blows my mind how questions which essentially boil down to "How do I best manipulate you for personal gain?" can be asked in such an unabashed fashion.

Introducing a separate charge specifically targeting those of your customers who choose to self-host your hilariously fragile infrastructure is certainly a choice.. And one I assume is in no way tied to adoption/usage-based KPIs.

Of course, if you can just fence in your competition and charge admission, it'd be silly to invest time in building a superior product.

It is, yeah, the process is the same: boot into a rescue system running in memory, and do whatever you want with the disk.

You can always upload your own, it's pretty simple doing so in a reproducible manner using something like Packer, but even without it you can just boot a VM into a rescue system, write your OS of choice to the VM disk and reboot.

Technically there are two clients: The camera and whatever device is used to access the feed.

I can absolutely imagine an architecture where video can be streamed in an encrypted manner, or stored in encrypted time-stamped blobs, allowing the server to provide rough searching, and then the client can perform fine-grained scanning.

This obviously doesn't enable any kind of processing of the video data on the server side, and doing it on the receiving client would require the feed to be active This means that any kind of processing would almost necessarily have to happen on the sending device, which would probably increase the power and compute requirements by a lot.

Doing a self-audit like this is actually an amazing idea. I consider and re-consider my choices every once in a while, but sitting down and doing an end-to-end write-up would put me a lot more at ease.

Like you, I also considered the implications of mixing TOTP into KeePass, but eventually landed on going all-in on the one database. It does mean raising the bar for keeping it secure, but it was already very high to begin with.

One thing I have considered is combining this all-in-one approach with an additional keyfile, which I could then share OOB to devices, effectively adding a second factor. I like the idea of using Yubikey or similar, but the fear of locking myself out is too great.

Oh don't get me wrong, my claim is that they are not even clearing the absolute lowest bar when it comes to their stewardship of the Bitnami repositories: Do no harm.