However everything I’m finding is listed as intended for switches/routers

They reuse the same casing.

You can check the pattern, but those ears should mount just fine on it.

Expanded rest API, an MCP, and the webhook options and integrations are significantly expanded.

AI/LLM coding assistance is permitted but the author must understand/review the patch and take responsibility – including that the contribution is LGPLv2.1+ compatible. The NetworkManager policy also will not allow AI assistance in communication for the upstreaming/review of said patches.

Actually given that, if you have a weekly with AI as part of it, tagging [AIT] will allow people to filter it out.

Its pretty ancillary to the newsletter itself so its not really required, but just to mention… if it were tagged, any low effort comments like “slop” or similar would then be removed. I don’t really see that on your posts in general though, so more a thought for later should it become a problem.

Please tag your post ( [CBH] or [AIP] ) and if AI was used, add the disclosure

See rules 7&8 and message with any questions

Thanks!

https://usevia.app/ would be the easiest approach AFAIK.

At the bottom should be a layers button, you’ll want a momentary to set a layer as active, then pick the key that you want to assign f7 to when the new layer is active.

Can’t you add a layer to add F7? You can do it as a momentary layer too on that model, its qmk under the hood I think

Telemetry is one reason.

Not having to worry about the service shutting down (Google Reader) is another.

Synced read status is a common one as well.

You may also use it in combination with another service to create RSS feeds for sites that dont have one.

Honestly having it not just get killed like Google Reader is a big chunk of the userbase.

Edit: Completely misread things, I thought you had 192.168.10.0 and 192.168.20.0. Yes it would be the whole subnet for a /24, if you wanted less you’d go higher as mentioned.

192.168.0.0/29 would include 192.168.0.1-192.168.0.7.

/28 would get you up to 192.168.0.15.

No, /24 is just 256 IPs.

192.168.0.0/24 = 192.168.0.0 mask 255.255.255.0, or 192.168.0.1-192.168.0.254.

If you want 192.168.0.0 through, say, 192.168.7.254, you need to cover 2k ip’s, which is a /21. The mask would be 255.255.248.0.

A /24 would only be the last octet.

Third party apps haven’t been a thing for a while, people were saving snaps without notifying the user who sent the pictures, resulting in the whole thing going against their purpose (and why they got popular - mostly sending nudes because they disappeared).

So they cracked down pretty hard.

In terms of privacy, assume nothing on the platform is private.

Then you are missing the [CBH] tag.

If its a single image, I’d agree. If its a compose with multiple images though, better off combining into a single lxc or VM.

I got so annoyed when work tossed a system with that case. It was supposed to be set aside, but someone missed the memo.

Proxmox supports OCI containers natively now

As of 9.1, and kind of. To be clear what its doing is not a drop-in replacement for docker, but using that image as a basis for an lxc - so you’re not just pulling a new image to update, more like re-deploying, so keep your stored data elsewhere, outside of the lxc. So what was handled by pulling an image or a change to a compose is done manually in proxmox now, but it does make things like backups/snapshots much more consistent and proxmox-native.

DIY robovac time!

I wanna see full uprights, like the canister vacs mounted on an rc truck base.

If you waited long enough to get past the account duration requirement and it was open source, where people could evaluate and comment on what they see, yes.

If it were paid/closed source, then no, not without using that alt constantly to meet the requirements.

The point in the first place was the large influx in promo postings that were made, as well as create filterable tags for users who are or are not interested in seeing AIT or AIP. It also means for those who create an AI involved project, no matter the level, aren’t being bombarded with low effort, one word disparaging comments.

If you have another idea, or some way you believe a third person can have any realistic insight to provide a disclosure, you are welcome to create a meta discussion on it as there were for rules 7 & 8 already.

Its required for self promotion, there is no way for a third party to know the details to tag and disclose.

It would be like posting plex feature updates. There is no way for the poster to know whether or not any AI was used in development (though given the Plex trajectory, we all know, but thats a different matter).

Doing Things For You is not its best use.

Thats a bingo!

I find it a great tool for QA/QC (with RAG, without its… eh), managing tone in a document, finding potential security issues, etc.

But doing it all for you I have not found to be a useful experience.