Yeah, I’m sure Finamp and the rest of the Jellyfin options people are recommending do the trick for most people, but I’m really happy with PlexAmp.

It also has Chromecast capability and is to my knowledge the only self-hosted option that does so. Really handy for casting to speaker systems, though I’m guessing many people just use Bluetooth for most off-device playback.

It’s whether the OS has hardware to make the platform “trusted.” Android does by default with Widevine, Windows does by default with TPM and Widevine, Linux does not by default.

“Trusted” here of course means, trusted by the company, not by the user. If it’s a trusted platform, it has a cryptographic key exchange space that the user does not have access to. This prevents a spoofed DRM certificate or other interception of the HD stream, which in theory prevents a stream from leaking.

“In theory” of course, because every piece of content is ripped and available DRM-free as soon as it’s released.

The headline is misleading, but the article reports it correctly.

In copyright law in the US, there is a 3-year statute of limitations. However, some jurisdictions follow the “discovery rule.” This is a court-made doctrine that allows a lawsuit to be filed beyond 3 years if the plaintiff can show they only discovered the infringement after the statute of limitations ran out, with some other extenuating factors. However, there is also the issue of damages. Under a sister legal doctrine, damages that are more than 3 years old have been barred regardless of whether the discovery rule allows a lawsuit. Effectively negating the discovery rule.

The Supreme Court in this situation held that damages follow the discovery rule. Meaning, if the discovery rule applies, then damages can be sought. The Court explicitly said it wasn’t ruling on whether the discovery rule applied.

The decision doesn’t expand or create the discovery rule that allows lawsuits beyond 3 years. That already existed.

Interestingly, this is a rare time when I agree with Gorsuch on the dissent. He basically said, “The damages is moot because the discovery rule is made up and shouldn’t even apply, so the majority is wasting its time even entertaining that damages can be sought.”

From their website: https://futo.org/what-is-futo/

What is FUTO? FUTO is an organization dedicated to developing, both through in-house engineering and investment, technologies that frustrate centralization and industry consolidation.

Ok… So what does that mean?

Through a combination of in-house engineering projects, targeted investments, generous grants, and multi-media public education efforts, we will free technology from the control of the few and recreate the spirit of freedom, innovation, and self-reliance that underpinned the American tech industry only a few decades ago.

FUTO is not reliant on any existing tech company or venture capital firm for its funding. We are not expecting quick profits. We will never cash out with a sale to a megacorporation the moment our technology begins to catch on. We will focus entirely on the mission.

If you share these goals, either as a user or a developer, we ask you to watch this space and get ready to throw off the stultifying limitations of the current state of affairs. We want to return to an era where a substantial portion of computer users can understand, control, and use their technology as they see fit without the approval or input of oligarchs. And we need your help.

Ok so… What does that mean?

Maybe the OP’s video explains these things (I hate watching videos for things like this), but I really thought I’d be able to find an explanation, in practical terms, of what this organization actually does on their own website.

Old is a state of mind, and these execs are OLD.

What does it mean that it’s “opt-in”? Meaning, my opt-out is just to never update Immich again?

From what we have seen from Zaslav, I wouldn’t be surprised if they’re going to claim another creative tax write-off for the non-depreciated value of the assets.

I read the whole thread just waiting to see something that would make me go, “Oh, see, there it is - that’s how it’s a trick. That’s why it’s a double-speak betrayal.”

And…I didn’t see it. It honestly looks like they are doing a thing to help develop the product in a way that as a user, I want; and they are not throwing current users under the bus or bait-and-switching what we were promised when we committed to the platform.

New users may not have it quite as good, but it still seems reasonable, and honestly - getting involved early is something that should be rewarded in special ways. We accept it in all sorts of other contexts (just with more up-front information, but not in materially different outcomes).

I appreciate this thoughtful reply. I read it a few times, I think I understand the goal. Basically you’re systematically closing off points that leak private information or constitute a security weakness. The IP address and the ports.

For the VPS, in order for that to have no bandwidth loss, does that mean it’s only used for domain resolution but clients actually connect directly to your own server? If not and if all data has to pass through a data center, I’d assume that makes service more unreliable?

I’ve saved this. I set up unraid and docker, have the home media server going, but I’m absolutely overwhelmed trying to understand reverse proxy, Caddy, NGINX and the security framework. I guess that’s my next goal.

Under US law (I see someone else posted about EU law):

Physical property has a long tradition of legal rights that are a part of ownership. There’s a thing called “right of first sale” that means you have the right to sell an object that you own. This legal framework falls under property law, even if the media on the disc is also governed by copyright law. In this case, property law is inviolate - it trumps copyright law.

Digital files are instead governed only by copyright law. Further, media companies could not modify copyright law fast enough to keep up with the digital revolution, so more than copyright, digital files are controlled by digital rights management (DRM) code, and contract law (the long TOS when you access a service or site).

The contract law in the TOS, and code in the DRM, do two things: they force a digital file owner to treat it as a “license,” and give media company the ability to severely restrict use after the purchase.

So basically, when you buy a disc, you are simply getting a lot more rights to use that content. You literally own the copy.

This is why media companies are doing everything that they can to switch customers over to streaming services and stop selling physical content. It’s also why it’s a literal lie when you are told you can “buy” digital copies that have DRM, because those companies will simultaneously charge you the higher “purchase” price and deny you ownership rights as if you bought a disc.

Yup, this is the answer - if they need to be able to open the video with just the link, there’s functionally no difference if it’s self-host or YouTube unlisted. Just a lot less effort.

Thanks, appreciate it (I’m new to local text CPU models, I know it was a stupid question).

Second, I found it very quickly that the amount of RAM you have is critical. My main server is a core i5 4th gen, and so I put AI software on another one of my servers which is a core i5 7th gen. You would think that the latter would work a lot better, but it had half the ram, and it basically wasn’t even able to get started.

Is there an amount of RAM that’s currently considered the bare minimum for CPU-only self-hosting?

Bypass Paywall Clean D extension

https://gitlab.com/magnolia1234/bypass-paywalls-chrome-clean

This is the project and what I use for Chrome. I’m not sure what the benefits of “Clean D” is, but this works.

I didn’t know about this, thanks for sharing. Can I get a source?

The court heard that Kurtaj had been violent while in custody with dozens of reports of injury or property damage.

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-67663128

Copying information is a nonrivalrous activity. To steal inherently requires the owner to be deprived of a thing, and copying does not deprive an owner of a thing. Copying therefore cannot really in “stealing.”

I built my last computer during the pandemic, and put in a blu-ray writer (obviously DVD and CD backwards compatible) just for legacy purposes. It was actually hard to find a case with a 5.25" front bay. In two years I haven’t used it once.

It’s a shame - digital media DRM is going to escalate quickly once there is no physical media sold, since all our PCs have TPM chips now, so this may not turn out well for us - but I’ve accepted it’s inevitable at this point.