go $fsck yourself

Sometimes I like to say “counter-widdershins”

• Alice in Chairs
• Queers if the Stone Age
• Scone Temple Pilots
• Ho Doubt
• Red Hot Child Peppers

Jabba could’ve been NalHutta

To add to that, to effectively use docker and basically anything important for self-hosting is to learn the basics of Linux.

A good resource for that is https://learnlinux.tv/

At first I read the title as

How much pareidolia is too much?

And I was bracing for a fun thread, but then my brain caught up and now I’m disappointed.

Yeah, I’m not buying into your trolling. Go somewhere else.

Interesting how you feel the need to disingenuously misrepresent my point.

What registrar was that? Were they as big as Cloudflare? How exactly did they “go tits up”? Isn’t the situation you describe a completely different scope from an individual’s usecase? It’s also an anecdotal point of data without including the full context of how common that situation is. “It happened to me once, and I have heard stories” does not necessarily mean it’s common enough for everyone to prepare for every time. I’ll remain skeptical of the

Mainly, though, I’m not saying it’s a bad idea in total. I just think that for someone who is inexperienced with DNS management and self-hosting, those types of concerns are already unlikely and just keeping the environment simple and cost less has far more value than being prepared for unlikely scenarios. It could even prevent self-inflicted issues by keeping it simple, which would be far more likely than Cloudflare’s infrastructure creating a problem that they have to remediate themselves.

If anything, the true argument for risk mitigation would be to have multiple DNS servers for redundancy.

I just don’t believe that, in this type of usecase, it’s worth pressing for and that there’s more of an argument to keep it simple.

Additionally, you can leave out trying to use your credentials and a hypothetical group of people to make your argument for you. It makes it seem like you’re trying to talk down.

I get that you’re likely exaggerating by saying “it’s no extra work”, but managing another account is markedly extra work. It will also cost extra because Cloudflare does not add any markup for registration, which is why they are the cheapest registrar.

I think the convenience and reduction of cost greatly outweighs the highly unlikely situation where “something goes fucky”. If it does, then what? You can’t make DNS updates for a little while?

The most likely reason to get locked out is billing issues, or maybe you lost your login information or something like that, which is going to be the same risk regardless of who your registrar is. Otherwise you’d have to be involved in some sort of legal issue associated with your domain and that is a much deeper issue than can be solved by simply changing nameservers.

Look, it was not a perfect analogy. There’s no need to be nitpicky and only focus on the fact the analogy is not perfect. I was grasping at straws to try to convey a difficult concept while I felt people were attacking me.

Actually, you’ve pretty much nailed what I’ve been trying to say.

That’s a good way of rephrasing my point. Calling it “black and white” is an analogy and not explicitly what they see. While we don’t know how the brain interprets vision without comes from our perspective (“is my blue your blue?”), it’s not “black and white” in the way we know it.

The title just states it as if they explicitly see only “black and white” and I was just trying to point out the difference. It spreads bad information phrased like that.

I don’t need an article to describe how colors are reproduced through RGB, not only because I already am familiar with it but because it is irrelevant to the discussion.

The problem is that you’re trying to relate things that are entirely incompatible. You cannot describe the concept of an entire lack of any experience with color by using colors. That’s the exact issue I am trying to point out. The idea of “black and white” or “grayscale” simply requires having experience with color, so that does not apply.

It seems you came here just to piss on my analogy, rather than trying to help and have a discussion.

Null would be completely blind, no visual data at all.

Then what is 0 and 1 when you interpret my example like this? I think you missed the point of my example.

The whole point is to say that “no color” does not mean black and white. It just means no color data. Similar to how a person born completely blind does not see all black, they just don’t see anything at all. They don’t receive any visual data and their brain does not process color, light intensity, or any optic information at all.

No. The article states “total absence of working cones in their eye retinas, leaving them with only rods”.

I’m trying to say that not being able to see color does not mean black and white or grayscale, it means the brain does not decipher color hue.

My example of the blind spot was to outline that a lack of receptors does not mean black, white, grey, whatever. It means a lack of signals to the brain to process anything. In the case of lacking cones, it means an inability to process color. When it’s described as “grayscale” that’s to help people understand a concept that is difficult for some people to grasp.

Think of it this way. Black is like 0, White is like 1, and Grayscale would be a float (decimal) between 0 and 1, while Colorblind is like NULL.

Well, it states “total color blindness” so, effectively none.

My point is that when you have “total color blindness” it simply means you cannot effectively discern the difference of of color. That does not mean “black and white.”

For example, everyone has a blind spot in their eye where the optic nerve passes through the retina. This area has no photoreceptor cells, so there is a spot in each eye that cannot see. When you look through one eye and close the other, do you see a black void spot? Is it a blank white area? No. It’s just… nothing.

“Total color blindness” does not mean “sees only in black and white”

Edit -
The reason I say this is that the phrase “only sees in black & white” in the title could easily be taken literally, making it sound like a simple black-and-white picture. While it’s the most common and helpful analogy, colorblindness is more nuanced than that. I suggest a slight change in the title to offer more clarity:

TIL that due to a genetic bottle neck, 10% of the population of the pacific atoll of Pingelap has achromatopsia, i.e. total color blindness, like seeing in “black & white”

~Rant about people’s reactions in this comment thread~

I noted that this was something added automatically by Ghost, the blogging platform the website is hosted on.

However, ultimately there is no good way to discern if a link like that is not an affiliate link or a non-anonymous tracking link, particularly for the average user. Particularly when the link does not include nofollow on the anchor tag.

You’ll be fine to move them to Cloudflare.

What the other user is describing would be an extremely rare scenario, and you should be able to change registrars in that case anyway.

There’s really not much of any practical benefits of that kind of excessive “risk mitigation”.

Yeah, I think the title is just bait to get more clicks. Leveraging legitimate fear for what Trump’s administration is doing to garner more clicks is pretty scummy.

It’s also ironic that the premise they are playing on to write this article is anti-trump, but then they go on to list Protonmail even though the CEO has been kicking Trump’s boots.

Edit - Oh, look at that… a referral link to Proton.

They also use GoDaddy for their domain registrar. No one who runs a website and uses GoDaddy should be trusted to provide any reliable advice on anything tech related.

Okay. What the fuck?

*Again - no affiliate links. You can count on that, for every post on this blog. I don’t profit from you as a reader in any way beyond your direct support, if you so choose.

Then what the fuck is this?

Edit again - Apparently their site is a Ghost blog, which has a feature that adds that referral parameter automatically. It’s called “outbound link tagging”. At least it was not intentional, but it does show more evidence that this person should not be relied on for good information.

I find their website so awful and painful to use. Everything is difficult to find and just takes longer to accomplish than nearly anywhere else. I bought one domain from them once and will never use them again.