• 0 Posts
  • 45 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 1st, 2023

help-circle



  • I was replying specifically in the context of the original question. Unraid already has their services tooling built out over containers so this person already is probably using containerized versions of the arr services. It would be overkill to go build vms for these services specifically for what you said. They don’t need to be windows or osx, they don’t need hardware passthrough, they don’t need a full kernel.

    That aside. You absolutely can run containers as a full isolated kernel and directly map hardware to them. CGroups absolutely allows for those use cases. You may not be using docker anymore but docker is more of a crutch for beginners who probably dont need those things.

    One example of this in the real world are COS and Bottlerocket which are literally distributions of Linux where even core is components are individually running under different containers via cgroups. COS runs on every GKE cluster in the world and bottlerocket on most EKS clusters.



  • I built my recommendation around the likelihood this person is already using docker and therefore already has containers that would be extremely easy to run without unraid. There would be less lift to use the same config files and volume mounting they are already using.

    Operationally though I would never run vms and containers in the same orchestrated system. Look at what they are asking to do. Why would you run sonarr as a container and radarr as a vm. Obviously they are going to end up just doing one or the other


  • I legitimately don’t understand the trendiness of proxmox given that vms are overkill compared to containers. If you are migrating from unraid you are likely already using the docker version of all your arr services so going and spinning up vms feels like a step backwards.

    You can either use the exact same containers and use systemd to run them as raw services or use something like docker compose or dozens of other tools to orchestrate them. I use k8s but can’t recommend it with a straight face after taking down VMs for being overkill (very different kinds of overkill but still)





  • Waymo doesn’t give a shit if their cars are ugly and can cover them in dozens upon dozens of cameras and sensors. They’re not selling them to consumers who care about looks, they are renting them to riders who don’t want to die on the short trip. They also only operate in a small region of the country with limited weather conditions and frequently stop service when weather is bad.

    Tesla is run by an idiot who insists that a pair of cameras and a single lidar sensor that they keep deciding to disable can somehow magically always work in all weather and lighting conditions and is selling to consumers who don’t want an ugly car and expect to be able to operate their purchase at all times

    Different constraints leads to different levels of success






  • unique screens have unique canvas fingerprinting.

    Exactly what I just said? Don’t use unique screens and you are less identifiable. The most anonymous browser is a freshly wiped two year old Apple device running safari or chrome from a university campus or coffee shop. A million other laptops have the same base canvas fingerprint.

    Fewer people use Linux. Fewer people use specialized browsers. Fewer people have external displays. All those things make you easier to fingerprint than a vanilla machine.

    Is it possible you misread what I typed?