• 1 Post
  • 117 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 14th, 2023

help-circle



  • I’m a web dev with a wife who is a researcher, and on the side I’ve built a few tools for her work. Web apps are great because cross-platform distribution and compatibility are non-issues. If you don’t need a database or server-side logic, a client-side only application is basically free to host given that it’s ultimately just a pile of static files. You can use localstorage for persistence, and because there’s no server logic you have a lot fewer security implications to worry about.

    JavaScript gets a bad rap, but if you pair it with typescript and decent tooling it’s really not bad. HTML and CSS are an incredibly powerful engine for building UI, which is only getting better.


  • traches@sh.itjust.workstoSelfhosted@lemmy.worldCloud storage/backup
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    So there’s a storage protocol called “S3” (I wanna say it stands for simple scalable storage?), first created by Amazon for AWS. Many types of software, including backup programs, have been designed to use it as a storage backend. There are now many S3 compatible providers, last I looked the best value was backblaze B2.

    You need a backup program with end-to-end encryption, S3 compatibility, and whatever other features you like. I use restic but it’s CLI only, there’s also borg backup and many others.

    If you encrypt locally with a good key, you don’t have to trust the remote storage provider. They just see a bunch of meaningless noise. Just don’t lose the key or your backup is useless.







  • I didn’t say it was stable, I specifically said it was unstable. Because it is. I said arch is reliable, which is a completely different thing.

    Debian is stable because breaking changes are rare. Arch is unstable because breaking changes are common. In my personal experience, arch has been very reliable, because said breaking changes are manageable and unnecessary complexity is low.


  • I could not disagree more. Arch is unstable in the meaning that it pushes breaking changes all the time, (as opposed to something like Ubuntu where you get hit with them all at once), but that’s a very different thing from reliability.

    There are no backported patches, no major version upgrades for the whole system, and you get package updates as soon as they are released. Arch packages are minimally modified from upstream, which also generally minimizes problems.

    The result has been in my experience outstandingly reliable over many years. The few problems I do encounter are almost always my own fault, and always easily recovered from by rolling back a snapshot.


  • traches@sh.itjust.workstoLinux@lemmy.mlWhat distro do you use for your servers?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    It’s not conventional wisdom, but I’m happiest with arch.

    • I’m familiar with it
    • can install basically any package without difficulty
    • also love that I never have a gigantic version upgrade to deal with. sure there might be some breaking change out of nowhere, but it’ll show up in my rss feeds and it hits all my computers at the same time so it’s not hard to deal with.
    • Arch never really surprises me because there’s nothing installed that didn’t choose to put there.
    • arch wiki

    Tempted by nixos but I CBA to learn it.