Sarsoar

It's an elephant seal

That is how conservatives see women, as livestock, as property.

My setup is this:

1. cloudflare dns mapping my domain to an oracle cloud vm. 2)oracle always free tier, 1 core amd vm, with apache reverse proxy. I also have tailscale running on this machine. You have to setup the networking rules in the oci networking area, and setup ufw/iptables as well. So then jellyfin.whatever gets mapped to tailscale_ip:jellyfin_port at home.
2. My server at home with tailscale as well so it has its own ip, but you can expose routes and use the same internal ip. Jellyfin server runs here. There is a dedicated user with appropriate access to my nas aswell.
3. This server has a vm on it that runs prowlarr/sonarr/radarr/lidarr and qbittorrent. I have an airvpn account running here with a killswitch, and also qbittorent is only allowed to use the eddie interface. I port forwarded a dedicated port on the airvpn site and told qbittorrent to use that.

So me, my partner, parnets, and friends when outside my network can go to jellyfin.domain.whatever and login to my jellyfin. No ports open to the internet except 80/443 on the reverse proxy, and no ips to remember. That will give you some things to google to get started to replicate a similar setup for your needs.

I came here to comment basically this. Except I did it last year and accidentally broke that system. Was trying to do the working directory and mistyped and did the root dir.

For those that don't know, so many elevated permissions commands fail if permissions are too open. And even ssh breaks because your certs and authorized_keys need to be only readable by you.

I luckily was able to wipe and just restore an older image backup.

Yes most autistic people shouldn't suffer if we dismantle the oppressive societal constructs and stigma around the condition and treat them as human.

Most people shouldn't suffer if we break down the social constructs and stigma around them, from race, gender and sex, class, and many other factors.

Antinatalism is not about selectively culling autistic people. It is about the realization that society sucks and the societal constructs we have are likely to increase suffering and so we shouldn't have kids anymore until those issues are resolved.

I am gay, and a racial minority, and an antinatalist. I would hate to have a child knowing they would likely have to face racial discrimination just as much as I do not find it moral to have a child because they may be gay, or autistic, or gender nonconforming, or poor. All those things would likely increase their suffering.

But I wouldn't mind adopting any of those kids, even an autistic child, because live people are people and deserve love and compassion. Antinatalism is about the non-alive children that don't exist and the stance that they shouldn’t ever come to be, no matter what they end up being because in our current world, live likely won't be easy, they would likely contribute to the global environment crisis, and will likely increase the suffering in the world. And also they cannot consent to being forced into existence.

Objectively people with autism will have a harder life because of extra struggles. (Not that you can't have a good life, but you have a higher chance of struggling). The antinatalism movement is not about "improving the gene pool" or related to eugenicist ideals like you are implying, it is about reducing suffering. And the extreme conclusion is that the only certain way to reduce suffering is to stop breeding. (And not having children is not the same as some selective culling like you are implying is the 'spirit' of the post)

This isn't about exterminating autistic people, if the couple had adopted 3 autistic kids the op likely would not have had an issue. The op is pointing out how the desire to have "biological" children led to them doing a procedure that increased the likelyhood of having more than one child, and increased the likelyhood of complications.

Maybe "ruined 3 lives" is harsh, but I don't see this as eugenicist. It is standard antinatalism "having multiple children is bad when you could have adopted but your drive for 'blood children' led to this and they will now have a statistically more difficult life than their peers so you likely increased the net suffering in society out of selfishness"

Its about the hypocrisy and his insecurities. This is drag, this is gender affirming for him. He has toxic ideals about masculinity and has to change his appearance to conform to the social construct of the gender he wants to appear as. Same reason trump did it.

It is ok when he does it, but not when a trans man does it? When a cis man ages and has lower levels of testosterone and needs monthly injections that is ok. When a trans man wants the same injections for the same reason, lower natural levels of testosterone, then there is an issue. When a cis man is overweight and does not like the appearance of fat on his chest, and wears tight undershirts to hide breasts, that is ok. But when a trans man wears a binder for similar reasons there is an issue. When a cis woman gets breast augmentation because of whatever reason, unfortunately many times due to a toxic ideal of femininity and beauty standards that society pushes on them (not saying that breast augmentation is a bad thing, it may empower some women and make them feel more confident, and that is tangible and valid) then it is ok for that cis woman to get gender affirming care. But when a trans woman wants the same surgey, for the same reasons, to empower themselves and make them feel more confident in the gender constructs and ideals of feminity of our society, then there is an issue and they have to jump through hoops to get the exact same surgery.

This isn't about the shoes. It is about the hypocrisy of the right. It is about the cognitive dissonance and the fact that the anti-trans agenda is not about "rEaSOn" or "nATurAL oRdER" or whatever, it is about hurting people they deem different while enjoying the comforts they deny to others because of whatever antiquated religious ideas they were indoctrinated into.

I told my partner "I love you" when we started dating and they responded with "that's gay". We're both gay.

And it freaks the fuck out if that folder name exists. Like if you have a documents folder in a project's sharedrive, you can't add it to yours because documents exists.

The "add shortcut to onedrive" option defaults to your root onedrive, and doesn't differentiate what the original one drive name was.

I didn't see an option to change where the shortcut is made, it just defaults to root. You can manually move the shortcut after it is created though. But this was a pain last time I tried it.

Same with mapping a teams group shared folder. We have a teams for each project, and a resources folder in that. It is a pain to open teams, so I tried mapping it to my one drive where I already have a folder for each project. So you go to teams, "add shortcut to onedrive", go to your one drive folder and drag that shortcut to the appropriate folder, then repeat. Oh but project 3 is named differently and that folder name already exists in your one drive, here is some vague error. Ok, rename what I have in my onedrive, try to add the shortcut again, move shortcut, rename the file in my onedrive root back to what it was.

That dialog should just ask for a export location.

My last job got around the "make people gravitate towards the simplest passwords" issue by giving you a list of 10 randomly generated strings you could pick. ( you could refresh the list a few times though)

So what happened anyways, like the person you are replying to said, is we had passwords written everywhere. One guy kept a sticky not on the back of his badge (which got turned around alot so he would walk around with his password showing), another kept it on a sticky under his keyboard, and just in general we would find passwords written everywhere.

No that's ok. Thanks for doing this give away though, it's very nice.