Eh, spysjuk…

Native Norwegian, fluent English, proficient Danish and Swedish, intermediate German, basic mandarin.

Oh, and I know a lot of Spanish curse words

Maybe, and some might even engage in dating that involves age gaps.

An exceptionally blue midterm this year. Not gonna happen this time around, as it needs a majority far beyond what is achievable in just one midterm election, but the long term clue is to have people willing to hold him accountable, instead of a congress consisting of 50% yes-men.

There’s a lot of justified hate towards the dems, but believing voting for neither serves anyone but the doors in charge is naive at best

Fuck no

I’d say that a good starting point would be the smallest setup that would serve a useful purpose. This is usually some sort of network storage, and it sounds this might be a good starting point for you as well. And then you can add on and refine your setup however you see fit, provided your hardware is up to it.

Speaking of hardware, while it’s certainly possible to go all out with a rack-mounted purpose built 19" 4U server full of disks, the truth is that “any” machine will do. Servers generally don’t require much (depending on use case, of course), and you can get away with a 2nd hand regular desktop machine. The only caveat here is that for your (percieved) use cases, you might want the ability to add a bunch of disks, so for now, just go for a simple setup with as many disk as you see fit, and then you can expand with a JBOD cabinet later.

Tying this storage together depends on your tastes, but it generally comes down to to schools of thought, both of which are valid:

• Hardware RAID. I think I’m one of the few fans of this, as it does offer some advantages over software RAID. I suspect that the ones who are against hardware RAID and call it unreliable have not been using proper RAID controllers. Proper RAID controllers with write cache are expensive, though.
• Software RAID. As above, except it’s done via software instead (duh), hence the name. There are many ways to approach this, but personally I like ZFS - Set up multiple disks as a storage pool, and add more drives as needed. This works really well with JBOD cabinets. The downside to ZFS is that it can be quite hungry when it comes to RAM. Either way, keep in mind that RAID, software or hardware, is not a backup.

Source: Hardware RAID at work, software RAID at home.

Now that we’ve got storage addressed, let’s look at specific services. The most basic use case is something like an NFS/SMB share that you can mount remotely. This allows you to archive a lot of the stuff you don’t need live. Just keep in mind, an archive is not a backup!

And just to be clear: An archive is mainly a manner of offloading chunks of data you don’t need accessible 100% of the time. For example older/completed projects, etc. An archive is well suited for storing on a large NAS, as you’ll still have access to it if needed, but it’s not something you need to spend disk space on on your daily driver. But an archive is not a backup, I cannot state this enough!

So, backups… well, this depends on how valuable your data is. A rule of thumb in a perfect world involves three copies: One online, one offline, and one offsite. This should keep your data safe in any reasonable contingency scenarious. Which of these you implement, and how, is entirely up to you. It all comes down to a cost/benefit equation. Sometimes keeping the rule of thumb active is simply not viable, if you have data in the petabytes. Ask me how I know.

But, to circle back on your immediate need, it sounds like you can start with something simple. Your storage requirement is pretty small, and adding some sort of hosting on top of that is pretty trivial. So I’d say that, as a starting point, any PC will do - just add a couple of harddrives to make sure you have enough for the forseeable future.

deleted by creator

Obligatory; It’s called linux

Back in the day I used Nagios to get an overview of large systems, and it made it very obvious if something wasn’t working and where. But that was 20 years ago, I’m sure there are more modern approaches.

Come to think of it, at work we have grafana running, but I’m not sure exactly what scope it’s operating under.

Barring any hardware issues or external factors, will it run for 10000 years? Any logs not properly rotated? And other outputs accumulating and eventually filling up a filesystem?

Because despite what they believe, they aren’t challenging my world view. They’re peddling conspiracy theories and setting Olympic records in mental gymnastics to ignore mountains of evidence, all in an effort to present “proof” that has been refuted over and over again. It’s a position that is absolutely laughable and any flat earther who considers themselves rational have already presented enough anecdotal evidence that a debate on the subject will be as stupid as the belief itself.

The surrender wasn’t unconditional. Germany accepted a surrender which did not include Zeeland in the armstice. This also meant any maritime and air assets in the region.

Also, Netherlands had an offramp by surrendering. See my comment about being on death ground above.

Sounds more like what you need is a combination of a VPN and RDP. Have your machines connect to somewhere via whichever VPN protocol you prefer, and then you can access them via whichever protocol you prefer.

I’m old and crusty, so I mostly use openvpn, but wireguard will probably do as well.

There have been some, but I’m not sure to which extent.

That’s why I said “conventional”, which nukes aren’t

Time will show. There are some shitheads, such as Nick Fuentes, who have publicly disavowed Trump, and even Alex Jones is having a hard time defending Trump these days. Defection are happening, but any long term effect will probably be seen via a slow trickle and not a sudden drop in approval rating.

The truth is, most people don’t stay up to date on the news, so while the base probably won’t notice that the current Trump talking points are inconsistent at best, come a year or two and they will probably notice that they are objectively worse off after Trump decided to spend billions on a war with Iran for dubious benefits. We will never see a point of “That’s it, fuck you!” on xitter. Suddenly the support will lose critical mass and fade into the background just like the teaparty did.

I’m cautiously optimistic stemming from the fact that ideologies based on hate never succeed in the long run. They either fizzle out, eat themselves, or on rare occasions implode spectacularly.

Trump has also surrounded himself with yes-men, just like this Austrian corporal once did. While Hitler certainly had a loyal staff, they were far from competent; Göhring thought he could bomb UK i to submission. And the rest of the staff were more focused on licking rectoplasm than facing reality.

And even if Iran changed their minds, it’s not like the mines will just disappear

Why: I think it’s mostly a matter of trump wanting to make a name for himself outside of his maga cult. Neocons never liked him, and he hopes this might change it. Plus, a dose of realpolitik in an effort to seem tough usually works.

When: It will have to end soon, otherwise he’ll be shitting in his base. However, while wanting to pull back he’ll realize he has two choices:

• Declare “victory” and leave the regime still in power, leaving people (his base included) asking what all these tax dollars were spent on
• Keep going, losing more and more support from his isolationist base and then some. Iran is, at present, the most unpopular war from a US polling perspective, so it is highly unlikely there will be a rally-around-the-flag effect for him. Even more unlikely the linger it goes on - a war doesn’t become more popular over time.

How: Airstrikes will continue until the paragraph above has been addressed. And since Trump never reads history, he’s probably way too optimistic, never realizing this simple fact: No country/regime has ever unconditionally surrendered because of conventional airstrikes and bombardment alone.

To quote Sarah Paine (renowned military scholar and historian), once you put your enemy on death ground, meaning they will have to fight on or (probably) die, they will not surrender. Trump never offered the Iran regime an offramp, and while it sucks to be in Iran right now, they have no incentive to surrender.

Debian, imho. I use it on all my servers except for a few work-related use cases that actually require Centos

Never heard of him/her/them, so no.