They can also remain in Palestine and live alongside native Palestinians or return to their home countries under the right of return.

The point is that ethnic jews would no longer have the exclusive right of self-determination in Palestine.

Which looks worse? A country blatantly attacking its own citizens flying its own flag? Or a country attacking illegal immigrants flying a flag of a foreign country we’ve kinda’ had a war with in the past?

My point is that the protestors are there specifically to protest against the forced deportation of legally present non residents under racist, jingoist pretexts. Those people aren’t illegal, but they’re being deported because of their foreign status (particularly mexican and hispanic foreign nations). Flying the mexican flag (especially next to american national symbols) is meant to assert their right to be here, and that the community of LA stands with them for their right.

You’re suggesting that they instead waive american flags so that it looks like trump is abusing US citizens with the National Guard, when the whole point of the protest was to resist the forceful deportation of immigrants. If they were to ‘make it look like they’re US citizens’ then that would defeat the purpose of that demonstration.

Liberals (idgaf if that’s you or not) want to make this about Trump’s militarized crackdown on protests because that’s what materially affects them, ignoring the reason we’re in the streets protesting in the first place.

Please, PLEASE stop being a reactionary and understand how messaging and subtext works.

lmao, that’s not what reactionary means. Just fuck off already.

You’re saying protestors shouldn’t use Mexican symbols in their protest because it will be used as reactionary fodder for fascists. That’s the definition of whitewashing.

to alter (something) in a way that favors, features, or caters to white people

You don’t combat racism by whitewashing your protests.

It is the very title of the post in the 2nd link.

The post title says he locked the post, not that he banned anyone.

This one, however, advertises that it is welcoming as it desires to become larger.

It’s welcoming, but not to everyone. “No bigotry, hate speech, No zionists, No fascists”. Doesn’t say it’s limited only to activity on their server.

What you are missing is that additional people are being affected, beyond merely the instance admin and the people who wish to block that instance.

Every admin and every instance has their own rules and their own standard for who can participate in their communities. This admin has chosen the proactive route, but those who get locked out have plenty of other places to go, and they can even successfully appeal their ban. That’s the benefit of the fediverse, and I think it’s perfectly acceptable to preemptively ban people from your community if they display the kind of behavior you find unacceptable. It’s your party, and you can uninvite whoever you want.

I don’t have any problem with you sharing your take, but I haven’t seen anything here that I take issue with. You’re free to disagree but I like that server just fine.

Banning people for downvoting your posts is a little weird.

Where do you see that he was banning people for downvoting? He locked the post, sure, but things were certainly devolving in that thread. Looks like he just said an unpopular thing and then taunted downvoters for disagreeing.

As in, the instance is small for a reason, due to people avoiding it.

Frankly, I think large instances are a huge problem. I think every instance should be as small as midwest.social.

Yea, go nuts with avoiding it if you’re not a fan. I think seahorse would actually appreciate it if people who know they aren’t going to like his community not bother him with new registrations.

Like I said, I quite like that admin.

I get why people (especially people who do not share his perspectives) might not appreciate the blunt moderation, but I happen to agree with both of those examples.

The first one was someone abusing the report function against people who were not breaking any server rules. Midwest.social does not have a rule against calls to violence, and I personally do not have a problem with calling for violence against billionares, just like I don’t have a problem with calls to violence against nazis or genociders. If it were my server, and I was getting dozens of reports from the same person complaining about people wishing harm to billionares, I would probably ban them, too.

I honestly don’t see a problem with the second post, unless you just think he’s being an ass.

I quite like that admin, he has a very ‘no bullshit’ attitude.

I get why you might be confused though, he tends to issue bans for comments or posts on other instances that he finds or are reported (instance admins get reports from users on their instance regardless of if it originates on a different one). I actually quite appreciated it myself, but I very much share his political perspective so its not for everyone.

Midwest.social is small anyway, so its not a big deal.

Which looks worse? A country blatantly attacking its own citizens flying its own flag? Or a country attacking illegal immigrants flying a flag of a foreign country we’ve kinda’ had a war with in the past?

Those people are legal nonresidents you dipshit. They are protesting against the deportation of legally present foreign nationals. That’s the entire fucking point of the protest. What you’re calling ‘bad-optics’ is just flat out racist jingoism. There’s nothing wrong or illegal about flying another country’s flag, except through the racist logic of mass deportation. There isn’t anything wrong with protesting as a legal non-resident against your own targeted deportation.

Libs are afraid of Trump taking power under the delusion of some foreign invasion, and their genius strategy to stop him is to hide away anyone who gives latin-american vibes? Put away all the cultural and national symbolism so that we can say ‘look, there’s no invasion, there aren’t any latin-american immigrants here’? This is like people advocating for trans rights by arguing that it’s extremely rare to be trans. Ok, yea maybe that’s true, but it’s not a problem to be trans anyway, why does it matter at all if there are a lot of them or not? And if someone was running around scaremongering about marxists transing the youth, wouldn’t it then suddenly be a problem for libs if trans people were loudly and proudly displaying their identities?

Jesus christ, we are so fucking cooked. If this many liberals are totally bought in to this ‘bad protest optics’ shit, they will 100% be collaborating with the fascists.

It used to be that nonviolent protest was intended to provoke a violent suppressive reaction from the state. It might be uncomfortable to some but I think the white moderate that MLK agitated against are the same people concern trolling over the optics of various forms of nonviolent protest now.

Agitation is the point. Provoking violence from the state is the point.

IIRC Borderlands 3 scales the value of loot to the game’s difficulty setting, with some mechanics aimed at encouraging players to join online coops at high difficulties in order to earn more valuable loot. I imagine cheats undermine that intent, and I also imagine borderlands 4 might be aiming at a pay to play scheme.

I’m guessing this EULA is being used for all their IP with the intent of taking advantage of it in the future.

Others have already weighed in, but:

This warning doesn’t seem to be persistent. Using ublock/regularly clearing cookies seems to keep this at bay. Sometimes it helps to open new links in container tabs as well.

I got this earlier this week and clearing my cookies/using container tabs seems to reset it.

He’s an illegal immigrant, DEPORT HIM

But crucially HA’s commercial branch WILL have a bunch of your data, including voice processing and login info, if you do buy into their paid subscription service.

• their background as a nonprofit was oriented toward data privacy and portability to begin with. Their privacy policy is about as protective as they come. Compared with plex…
• they have a paid service but they offer their base product as FOSS

It would be great if JF did something similar, but I think they don’t specifically because they’d be liable for their users illicit use of it. That’s basically the whole reason OSS streamers exist. Plex started out that way, but when they decided they wanted to compete with the big boys they were forced to lock it down more to protect themselves against legal challenges. That’s why I think you’re kidding yourself if you think it’s a long-term solution for streaming ripped media. That’ll only last until copyright owners decide to push plex to take action against it.

But if the goal is for FOSS to be mainstream and a primary choice (and it can absolutely be, there are plenty of examples), then it doesn’t matter what I think.

I don’t think that should be the goal - FOSS as a model will never outcompete for-profit corporate models. IMO the goal should be to encourage people to learn the minimal amount of tech self sufficiency so that they can choose FOSS when they need it, rather than pushing FOSS to become OSS, and then eventually just SAAS. Firefox is a good example of what can go wrong with chasing mainstream adoption. There’s a place for projects like Plex, but im pretty adamant that those should be halfway solutions more than end-goals. I’m fine with leaving that as a disagreement.

I’d drop Plex in a heartbeat if Jellyfin was just as good to use for me and the rest of my household. But it isn’t. There’s no reason to blow smoke for Plex, but there is a reason to not delusionally pretend that open source alterantives are better than they are.

Nobody is saying JF is easier to use than plex, we just prefer the flexibility and privacy and aren’t bothered or slowed down by the complexity. That’s fine. You just have different priorities than the rest of us. I’m glad there’s an option for you.

Yea, I don’t disagree, and I don’t actually fault anyone for using plex for it’s simplicity of remote configuration.

I do think a lot of people overlook simple workarounds to doing straight reverse proxies. I’ve used a VPN to access my remote services without issue for a long time. Granted, that’s still a prerequisite skill a lot of people don’t have, but I think a lot of people already inside the self-host space already have that knowledge. And frankly, self-hosting as a concept stems from this idea that with a little bit of effort, we can free ourselves from corporately owned SAAS companies - it shouldn’t be so divisive to be advocating for self-sufficiency.

There’s absolutely a place for plex. It’s a lot of people’s first foray into selfhosting. But I think people miss the opportunity to learn a new skill when they decide they’re willing to put up with abuse instead of taking the hint that it’s time to migrate.

Yea, they were extremely vague about what the nature of their problem was, but they mentioned it was running on the same media library as their plex install. They insisted that it was because jellyfin was poorly designed and definitely not user error. Could have been a bunch of things, but it was almost certainly a config error. They said the server ‘locked up’ and all the other services became unresponsive any time jellyfin was scanning. They also did not like the way jf wrote metadata files to the media library volume. It was among their other complaints, such as ‘i didn’t like that you could reskin it’ and ‘it was too complicated to use for managing my book collection’.

sounded like a usergroup mapping issue to me but hard to say for sure. They said they weren’t interested in troubleshooting it so, whatareyagonnado? They seem really invested in not liking it though.

I have gotten into arguments here

Yes, that was the joke

is it a good thing for Home Assistant to provide a paid subscription service that will handle that for you?

There are so many differences between HA and Plex that it’s almost difficult to pick which one is most significant. All i’d say is - if plex was at all the same as HA, I would have zero problem with it. If jellyfin adopted HA’s model of paid development, I’d be thrilled. But HA’s strategy is actually pretty unique, it’ll take time for that structure to be stress-tested and propagate.

It does not need Google for anything here, having Google’s SSO doesn’t give them any information they already have.

Yea but not really - google accounts are usually pretty specifically identifiable to a person/ad account/collected internet and device activity. Might not be a big deal to you, but having those things tied together is problematic on a number of levels. You can self-host an SSO, and you can also have a security-focused third-party SSO - both would be marginal improvements over using google’s auth system in terms of privacy.

It does give that to Google, but if your concern is the cops are going to bang on your door for all your illegal pixels that you stream then you’re just as boned. It’s borderline irresponsible to pretend otherwise.

Yes, 100%. If you’re at all concerned about privacy, plex is a terrible idea, with or without SSO. I’m glad you agree.

How you get “I have nothing to hide” out of that is your own pretzel logic.

“What i’m doing is perfectly legal so it doesn’t matter if they have my detailed data”. You’re not hiding it because you think you don’t need to - that’s exactly the argument you’re making. Every step toward data privacy is valuable, even if your total data hygiene practice isn’t perfect. It still matters.

I have a right to store, backup and access my own media and to keep a copy of it for private use

Good for you. Most of us do not.

I’m not keeping a media server performatively

Neither am I, but I guess I do feel quite passionately about keeping it private and I’m not shy about advocating for the practice. Probably for the same reason you’re very tight lipped about what country you’re from - you don’t necessarily think you’ll get swatted if you do, just that it’s a pointless detail to share with strangers if you don’t have to. Most of my family doesn’t care enough about not using netflix or disney+ that they’re happy to keep using them if my offering is too complicated. I’m happy to help them set up and learn how the server works if they’re interested, and a number of them have become enthusiastic self-hosters themselves as a result. If I was operating a mission-critical service on my server then maybe i’d care more about minimizing UX friction but since it’s not, I’m happy with prioritizing privacy and control over polish. That’s a pretty common mentality for a server administrator - i’m not running a SAAS here. At most I’m just the enterprise IT manager trying to keep the office slack channel running.

For the record, I don’t have any misgivings about FOSS as a concept.

You can say that, but boy oh boy is that hard to believe. You certainly don’t think FOSS is worth any level of inconvenience. Looks to me like you’re the kind of person who wants the best tool for every job, regardless of if you could get by with a middling one that supports a FOSS project. That’s fine. I use adobe products for work because I can’t really get by without it, but I still use GIMP or Inkscape when I can and I support those ecosystems with my time and money because it draws more people in. And I actually do want my FOSS tools to be built as side projects, at least at first. There’s a place for polish and professional support, but a lot of this stuff needs to be built out and tested before that kind of thing happens. A lot of these projects act as beta testing for forks that will end up doing one thing really well to a high level of polish. Having a product that’s maybe a little complicated but extremely accessible from a configuration standpoint lets more tech-minded people build on top of them and work toward more polished solutions.

But I certainly don’t find VC backed projects entering into the FOSS space as a good thing. Maybe that competition drives positive movement in the open-sourced ones, but usually they turn out to be ‘embrace, extend, extinguish’ projects. Like, I don’t think meta’s Threads is a positive thing for federated social media, even though by this logic they are making it ‘more mainstream’ by their adoption of activitypub. There just isn’t a way to separate the product they produce from the economic model they operate under, and plex has chosen a model that inevitably leads to enshittification and walled-off content gardens.

I just don’t see any reason to blow smoke for plex. Their UX is fine (great, even), but they’re doing basically everything else wrong. They’re reliant on VC capital, they’re collaborating with private media and tailoring their TOS to protect copyright holders, they’re collecting data they don’t need and forcing features that reduce privacy, they’re changing their privacy policies to enable data sales and monetization, they’re bait-and-switching users by placing popular free features behind paywalls, they’re banning lifetime paid users for perfectly legal use of their services… the list goes on and on. At some point, a company like Plex crosses the line from ‘reasonable profit-seeking’ to ‘actively user-hostile’, and I think they’ve already crossed that line. Maybe you think their UX is worth the abuse, but I certainly do not - not when there’s a perfectly fine alternative that fits my needs and more.

So the Google login could be a problem by itself, and the Plex data gathering would be a much bigger problem by itself, but both together would just mean you are exactly as screwed as with just one.

That’s almost exactly what I was saying, except that using both actually increases your risk just by capturing more detailed logs of your server activity and the associated accounts. Your users could use anonymous usernames or share login credentials if they wanted to without it, but being forced to use google SSO means each user is personally identifiable even if they’re protecting themselves otherwise. It’s the same reason I would never use google’s SSO for another web service if I had an alternative, even if for something completely innocuous. Why give them extra information about my web activity and tie it directly to my verified account, even if it’s something trivial like what plex servers i use or how I’m watching my media and on what devices?

But mostly my point was that using google’s SSO by itself, with your own self-hosted server is dumb because it unnecessarily exposes you where you otherwise would have been fine. That was the whole point of this conversation - not that plex was specifically bad because they used it, but that it isn’t a desirable feature for plex or for a self-hosted alternative. Maybe you just misunderstood that, idk.

cosplay

Where I am people are being black bagged for less than just breaking DRM. I could be disappeared on my way to work tomorrow just for saying something silly like “from the river to the sea”. Maybe you’re privileged enough to feel secure in your legal standing, but that’s not one that I share. Like I said, i’ve gotten burned for using napster when I was young and dumb, and I thought I was safe then, too.

For most people this side of the pacific, ripping DVD’s for personal use is not legal, and streaming them to others is even less so. Any service hosted within the US is subject to that law. You being outside the US but using a private service hosted within it puts you squarely within that jurisdiction, but since you fancy yourself a lawyer, and since IDGAF anyway, i’ll let you mull it over for yourself. If all you’re afraid of losing is access to your plex account then all the power to ya. I just don’t agree with that value judgement.

I’m honestly not sure why you feel so cavalier about your data privacy. If you’re really one of those ‘i’ve got nothing to hide’ folks, I have a larger gripe with you than what a silly ‘plex vs jellyfin’ debate can cover. It’s incredibly shortsighted and normalizes apathy and complacency. There’s no reason to be exposing your private server usage data to private for-profit companies, especially when that activity is already borderline legal at best. My actual fear is that plex gains mainstream attention and comes under legal scrutiny. we go through another tightening of the screws because our bloated media market is bleeding and dragging the rest of the stock market down with it. That’s what happened with napster and the record industry, and it’ll happen with streamers and plex if we’re not a little more discrete.

Yes, rip your dvds. Yes, share them with whoever you want. Go pirate some animes or download a car, IDGAF. But don’t pretend like you’re somehow safe from punitive copyright action just because you’re off in Greenland or whereverthefuck. You’ll end up teaching normies bad habits and poor judgement when it comes to protecting their data privacy.

Again, just don’t be a dumbass about it.

I do care about self-hosting as a viable commercial alternative

Well there you go. I would really rather self-hosting not even be commercial.

I am not ready to give up on the changes required to get there just to feel cool on the Internet

Lmao yes look at me and my data hygiene, you’ll never be as cool as me. It’s clear that you have some misgivings about FOSS as a concept, I guess you can feel good about donating your money to a for-profit entity as a way to stick it to those hippies. God forbid I had tried selling you on linux in this thread, that could have really snowballed.

There are a lot of people here who simply cannot be bothered to figure out remote access

A weird one i saw today was actually “jellyfin took too many resources scanning my library” and ‘if it doesn’t have an SSO my family won’t use it’

I think a lot of people just enjoy plex better and will accept any minor inconvenience as justification. That’s fine though. I’ll swear up and down that apple products are not worth the convenience, either, but there will always be people who simply like them more than others, and thats fine

Also, me using Plex to host copies of my own software legally is not the same as operating a P2P service.

I’m not explaining this to you again. What you described is not legal on a US hosted service like Plex, and even most other countries with DRM exceptions for personal use do not include sharing outside your immediate household. Even if it’s perfectly legal in your country, and the US can’t touch you where you are, Plex is still obligated to abide by US restrictions. Good enough if that doesn’t bother you, but it isn’t completely without risk and you should be well aware of it.

if your concern is the govenrment overreach implications of having a portion of your data leaked, worrying about a smaller leak along the way of actively generating a larger leak is entirely pointless.

What exactly does “government overreach” mean in this context?

Using Google SSO independently is bad. Plex independently is bad. Using both together is worse. Using either while also breaking the law, when there’s a perfectly acceptable way to do neither of those things and still just as easily break the law is a whole lot better.

Conversely, I’d argue that if you have a dozen users and are terrified that the cops are going to come and raid the… I’m gonna say meth lab you’re running on the side, we’re back to the conversation about how cool you are with that dozen users having their Jellyfin clients running on a bunch of Android devices, Smart TVs, Windows boxes or whatever else.

I’m just not a dumbass. Having a dozen users log in without any of them publicly pointing at me or my server IP is a hell of a lot safer than letting a private service log every sign-in and stream event of the server, and then letting a separate private service link those users to accounts with detailed personal information. Those people can install jellyfin on their phones and tablets all they want - google wouldn’t know what servers those clients are connecting to anyway. And even if they did, my server is not associated with my personal details or ISP-assigned IP address. Maybe you just didn’t know that, idk.

I came into this argument from the UX angle, you guys are increasingly convincing me that a significant disincentive for self-hosting to become mainstream

Using a google SSO isn’t a prerequisite for self-hosting becoming mainstream. Maybe SSO generally is, but there are a dozen other ways to achieve the same thing. Maybe I don’t care if it becomes mainstream? Maybe what I actually want is for people to learn tech self-sufficiency so that we’re not indefinitely reliant on SAAS. Maybe i’m content with my special little hobby and I’d rather point and laugh at people who get fucked over by services they delude themselves into believing won’t ever screw them, just because they can’t be bothered to learn a new skill.

you guys are increasingly convincing me that a significant disincentive for self-hosting to become mainstream is that its entire community is convinced that they are doing something wrong, apparently

If you’re as concerned with self-hosting becoming as mainstream as you claim you are, then I’d imagine you’d be more concerned with the late-stage capitalist reality of media distribution and the increasingly restrictive laws surrounding its use. Where I live, the legal structure that protects the right to self sufficiency is very much under question, and continues to get worse. I got burned several times in the napster/limewire days, before it was established precedent that sharing digital copyright material was illegal, and unheard of still that anyone actually got punished for it. I know better than most that you can’t count on those protections indefinitely.

But as an anarchist, I think a little bit of crime is good, actually. More people should be doing crime. But if you’re gonna do it, do the rest of us a favor and don’t be a dumbass about it.