Which is why I asked, because we are in a linux comm here. I don’t put aside games that do shit on Windows, as long as they work fine on Linux.

How would it work on Linux then?

I think CryptPad has delete-after-view.

Edit: yes, it has

True.

Although in Germany for example it can also be an issue when recording. If you have a security camera pointed at a public space (that can include the sidewalk infront of your house), passersby can sue you to take it down and potentially get you fined. Even pretending to constantly record such an area can yield that result.

So, buzzer WRONG.

Quite arrogant after you just constructed a faulty comparison.

If I say my name is Doo doo head, in a public park, and someone happens to overhear it - they can do with that information whatever they want. Same thing.

That’s absolutely not the same thing. Overhearing something that is in the background is fundamentally different from actively recording everything going on in a public space. You film yourself or some performance in a park and someone happens to be in the background? No problem. You build a system to identify everyone in the park and collect recordings of their conversations? Absolutely a problem, depending on the jurisdiction. The intent of the recording(s) and the reasonable expectations of the people recorded are factored in in many jurisdictions, and being in public doesn’t automatically entail consent to being recorded.

See for example https://www.freedomforum.org/recording-in-public/

(And just to clarify: I am not arguing against your explanation of Twitch’s TOS, only against the bad comparison you brought.)

My impression of Starfield (after release, at least) was, that it was a bunch of pretty well intended and implemented subsystems (as is, to my knowledge quite common in game development; each team works on a different one), but they just don’t fit really well together. All the subsystems are good parts of a theoretically good overall big picture, but the complexity seemed too high for them to actually flesh out the big picture.

Technically it all works, but IMO you feel the conceptual gaps whenever you transition (UX wise) from one gameplay mechanic to the next. It just doesn’t (or didn’t) feel like a cohesive game.

Server written in C++ and client in Java and Lua… now that’s an atypical combination. It still peaks my interest.

No, I keep that private to minimize the information I leak about what I host, sorry. (I also don’t do git-ops for my server; I back the mentioned directories up via kopia so in case of recovery I just restore the last working state of data+config. I don’t have much need to version the configs.)

What I did to get rid of my mess, was to containerize service after service using podman. I mount all volumes in a unified location and define all containers as quadlets (systemd services). My backup therefore consists of the base directory where all my container volumes live in subdirectories and the directory with the systemd units for the quadlets.

That way I was able to slowly unify my setup without risking to break all at once. Plus, I can easily replicate it on any server that has podman.

No, since at the moment it wants to manage certificates, but I don’t intend to run pangolin as my main reverse proxy.

Pangolin is the most user friendly self hosted alternative to Cloudflare tunnels. There are dozens alternatives, but none with that feature set and such a UI.

That would be so damn awsome, if I could finally play 4k 120Hz GfN on Linux.

I would rather bet that most people have no clue what an operating system is and that the one they (unknowingly) use is made by Microsoft. On the other hand if they play games (on that PC), they will know Steam, because they actively had to install it and click its icon frequently.

Yes. You can simply not expose SMTP at all and just use the IMAP/JMAP part. Unless you need also JMAP, I am not sure it brings you a lot to the table you wouldn’t also get from a good old dovecot. IMO the big advantage of Stalwart is the all-in-one package it delivers plus the good defaults. It also shines when you want a multi node deployment. For a single node IMAP only it might not be the best choice, in my opinion. But it would work, if you want to.

We can ask, but the indicators are there:

• it has roadmap with bigger features that slowly shrinks as they get implemented
• new versions still bring big reworks (I think this is the third time now that the data structure is being migrated)
• optimizations happen between the versions
• benchmarks are still on the horizon

It aims at both, otherwise it wouldn’t ship with sqlite and rocksdb. Stalwarts default is clearly for single node setups and expanding it to clustering takes further steps. So while it supports large scale deployments, it should not be limited to it.

It’s a 0.x release. It makes sense building the intended features first before optimizing heavily. There’s no point having an optimized data structure that then falls flat once you need to add new features that brings new requirements to the data structure.

Once they label it 1.x (i.e. feature complete and production ready) I would expect it to be optimized. If it isn’t, criticism is warranted.

The linked ticket also references a merge request that went stale. So I would assume this is a good starting point (I haven’t looked at the MR though, so I don’t know how far off from the potentially accepted solution it is).

I don’t think there is a technical reason. Simply no one was interested in implementing it yet. See Nate’s answer over at reddit and the associated ticket.

So once someone is motivated enough it will happen. But without contribution or extreme boredom by the core mainteners (haha) it won’t happen.

Well exactly as you say: it’s a single service instead of having to combine multiple. In my case dovecot was a lot faster for my mailboxes, but postfix was a piece of shit and I was happy to get rid of it and the many components (rspamd, dkimproxy, etc.) it required. It has far too many footguns, and I shot myself multiple times with them over the years. So the most important part (SMTP) is significantly simpler and IMO better with stalwart. And the mailbox part hopefully evolves as well (it already has JMAP, so that is already an advantage over dovecot as well).