this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2025
11 points (82.4% liked)

Selfhosted

52938 readers
646 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I'm up to this point in the guide, going over setting up VMs and the configuration to the network to accommodate them, and am wondering if anyone would recommend going a different route? Like was said in the beginning, this is just their workflow, that they've had for a while. Are there better ways to explore now?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Novocirab@feddit.org 14 points 2 days ago (2 children)
[–] victorz@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Man, we really can't have nice things in the 2020s, can we.

[–] Novocirab@feddit.org 4 points 2 days ago

Keep organizing and slowly things will get better

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago

Nope.
And you'll be happy.^(Not like you have any choice)
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[–] TomAwezome@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Does anyone have a TLDR of Drew's article here? I've seen enough of his keyboard-warrior frothing opinions and vitriolic rhetoric from his blog to avoid trusting it without some third party sources to back up his claims about things.

[–] kerobaros@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

tl;dr: FUTO has given Curtis Yarvin a platform to speak publicly on multiple occasions.

[–] TomAwezome@lemmy.world -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Oh, thanks, this is the first I've ever heard of Curtis Yarvin. Did he say anything bad during those opportunities to speak? I'm not sure it's "evil" to interview someone.

[–] tofu@lemmy.nocturnal.garden 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Excerpt from the Wikipedia introduction:

Yarvin has been described as a "neo-reactionary", "neo-monarchist" and "neo-feudalist" who "sees liberalism as creating a Matrix-like totalitarian system, and who wants to replace American democracy with a sort of techno-monarchy".[14][15][16][17] He has defended the institution of slavery, and has suggested that certain races may be more naturally inclined toward servitude than others.[3][18] He has argued that whites have inherently higher IQs than black people,[18] and opposes U.S. civil rights programs.[19]

[–] TomAwezome@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Wow, he does sound pretty nasty, that's messed up. I don't see though how FUTO interviewing a bad person makes the organization evil though.

[–] kuhli@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There's a difference between interviewing someone and helping thrm share their message

[–] TomAwezome@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Is that what they were doing? I haven't seen videos of them 'platforming' Curtis so I don't know whether they were helping him proliferate any specific message

[–] rearview@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The blog also stated that FUTO repeatedly gave money to other FOSS projects without following proper process for institutional sponsors, and stick their names onto their front page.

Aside from that, their own projects are source-available at best.

[–] TomAwezome@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Based on FUTO's own response, they don't put logos on the front page to "simplify things". I think that's a little weird. Is source-available distinct from open source? Still not sure how that makes them "evil" though, starting to think user Novi Sad might have been making a joke by calling them evil, perhaps being playful.

[–] kuhli@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes, source available is distinct from open source. Source available just means you can see the code. Open source allows you to modify and redistribute the code.

[–] bordam@feddit.it -1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

No, that's the difference between Open Source Software and Free Software