brickfrog

brickfrog , 14 days ago

That's pretty cool, thanks for sharing! Been a while since I tried it out but last I looked Tribler's own automation features were quite lacking so something like this helps a lot.

I was not able to download anything with more than 1 hops in between - ie it does hide your real IP address, but only uses one relay in between.

Hmm I don't think there's any relays at all in that configuration, unless you're counting the exit node itself?

https://github.com/Tribler/tribler/issues/3067#issuecomment-325367047

One thing to keep in mind is that to download torrents from outside Tribler's own network you would need to download through an exit node.. not sure on the exact stats but last I tested exit nodes were only like 5-10% of the Tribler user base. For a while I tried volunteering my own VPN connection as an exit node for Tribler just to see how it went but the Tribler client kept locking up/crashing after a few days so the experiment did not go well.. hopefully works better nowadays.

brickfrog , 14 days ago

True, wouldn't be too different vs just using a VPN. You're choosing to trust the Tribler tech and the Tribler exit node operator vs choosing to trust the VPN provider. Granted most VPN connections are going to have much better performance vs anything Tribler related.

There is a nice side effect of running an *arr stack against Tribler, even in 1 hop mode - Your Tribler node is much more easily pulling in new content into the Tribler network for other users to access afterwards without needing an exit node. Ideally it's just one Tribler node/user needing to pull data through the exit nodes while the rest would just pull it from you and share with other nodes in-network.

Torrents over I2P work the same way. If the torrent data isn't found within I2P and you have outproxies configured you could pull torrents from the clearnet & afterwards other I2P users just share amongst the I2P network.

brickfrog , 1 month ago

If you use Namecheap for email domain(s) you may want to consider also splurging for their PremiumDNS to keep your domain(s) off spam blocks at other email providers.

I help maintain some emails at Gmail/Google Workspace but the domains themselves are at Namecheap. For a while there were complaints that some emails never landed in other people's inboxes... this led me to talk about the issue with one of the email provider recipients based in the UK & apparently they were null routing anything coming from Namecheap since they felt a lot of spam came from them. But after some experimenting I figured out their system (& probably others) were figuring out they were Namecheap domains via the default FreeDNS they use. On a hunch I switched those domains over to PremiumDNS and after that all our emails were landing in other inboxes correctly. I guess maybe it makes sense, a typical spammer buying a cheap domain at Namecheap isn't going to splurge for the higher end DNS service for it.

I'm not saying all email providers treat Namecheap domains as spam but just be warned there definitely ones out there that do.

brickfrog , 1 month ago

If you’re using Google Workspace, Google will give you the appropriate DMARC, DKIM and SPF records to add to your DNS. The NS themselves should resolve the records and provide the recipient server with the values you’ve entered, thereby ensuring delivery.

Sure. But why would that matter when you're dealing with hostile 3rd party email providers that intentionally want to blackhole all email domains at Namecheap? But yes, just to clarify I do configure DMARC/DKIM/SPF and that works great for most cases.

I'm just describing what worked for me though in truth I don't know exactly how these hostile email providers actually determine the domain is hosted at Namecheap. My hunch is that they are using a lookup & finding the nameserver for the domain & have already blacklisted Namecheap's default free nameserver IP addresses. For whatever reason those same hostile email providers don't seem to be blacklisting Namecheap's paid nameserver but I think that sort of makes sense...

The larger issue is that Namecheap is known for cheap domains that scammers/spammers tend to buy in bulk & then use to spam with. Those same scammers/spammers aren't trying to spend extra money so they only ever use the default free Namecheap nameservers.

brickfrog , 1 month ago

But, regardless, blocking any registrars that size the way you’re describing would break way more businesses and hurt the recipient provider’s own reputation.

Yeah I thought that too but when speaking with the email admin that was blocking Namecheap while figuring this out they had already decided it wasn't worth trying to allow the 1% of valid emails vs the 99% spam emails they felt they received via Namecheap domains.

This honestly starting to sound more and more like a smear campaign

Smear against whom? I'm a Namecheap customer, just relaying my own experiences using them. Besides that quirk I like them fine as a registrar.. I know it sounds dumb but I even renewed my domains there even after those email issues.

It's fine, you don't need to believe me as I said it's just my own experience using Namecheap domains for emails. But you could just google around, you'll see plenty of people discussing Namecheap & looking for solutions to block them (or solutions to successfully send emails with hem).. it's not something I randomly made up if that's what you're implying.

e.g.

https://community.spiceworks.com/t/blocking-emails-based-on-registrar/816565

https://tacit.livejournal.com/608386.html

https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2021/05/why-do-scammers-love-namecheap/

https://www.reddit.com/r/NameCheap/comments/13t6fvm/namecheaps_private_email_is_blacklisted_by/

https://www.reddit.com/r/NameCheap/comments/wlb6vp/namecheap_making_it_too_easy_to_register_domains/

https://www.reddit.com/r/NameCheap/comments/tz4mkb/my_emails_are_always_going_in_the_spam_folder_of/

https://www.reddit.com/r/NameCheap/comments/ye358x/i_am_getting_a_ton_of_spam_scams_from_namecheap/

etc.

brickfrog , 1 month ago

Nice, I was pretty sure my Pixel 7 already had hardware AV1 decoding and this app seems to confirm it.

brickfrog , 1 month ago

Futurama also did their own version https://futurama.fandom.com/wiki/V-Chip

brickfrog , 1 month ago

If you make a community don't do it on lemmy.world, the admins at this instance have taken a hard stance against piracy related communities.

https://lemmy.world/post/13287681

https://lemmy.world/post/13320356

brickfrog , 2 months ago

Bummer, the formfactor / specs look okay but it's kind of a dead end if I can't just install & use a vanilla Debian OS or similar.

With all the NAS OS options probably Synology has the best one but even there I don't actually want to get locked into that. I doubt this UGOS software can match Synology's let alone Debian.

If it's any consolation it looks like UGREEN is responding to comments about installing other OSes at their kickstarter page https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/urgreen/ugreen-nasync-next-level-storage-limitless-possibilities/comments

brickfrog , 2 months ago

Fastmail is great but it's a totally different market /use case, you wouldn't go with them if you're privacy oriented. They're better than Google in that sense but you'd go with Proton if you're looking for privacy features.

Also keep in mind Fastmail is based in Australia and their government tends to be anti-privacy with the laws that get passed there.

brickfrog , 3 months ago

It's okay, killbots have a preset kill limit. Just send wave after wave of human soldiers at them until they shut down.

brickfrog , 3 months ago

Syncthing, Resilio Sync, or one of those browser based p2p file sends e.g. https://file.pizza or similar.

If both p2p ends know how to use torrents then creating a simple torrent to share to the other peer would work fine. But that requires slightly more IT competence especially if someone needs to open a port forward (ideally you would make sure you have your own port forwarded so the other party doesn't have to worry about this).

If you're doing this more than once it might be worth setting up a simple server e.g. HFS is a nice open source/free HTTP file server, been a while since I used it but it still seems to be active https://www.rejetto.com/hfs/

brickfrog , 3 months ago

Interesting, though I suspect that is a false positive, it's happened before with that software

https://rejetto.com/forum/index.php?topic=9037.0

Most likely because it is a self-contained web server executable? That sort of software would seem suspicious and similar to other sorts of virus/malware.

Granted I have not used it in a while but I'd be surprised if it were true, their forums and github would be full of reports of malware.

https://github.com/rejetto/hfs

That aside you have plenty of other options to use if you prefer to use something else.

brickfrog , 3 months ago

Yikes. I already unsubscribed from there, overall I get the vibe that the new mod is acting in bad faith & stirring up drama when none was needed. It's also clear the new mod doesn't particularly care for the existing community members, they are mainly just moderating for themselves it seems.

TBH someone could just create a lemmyapps @ any other Lemmy instance. I haven't spent too much time to figure out if that already exists.

brickfrog , 3 months ago

It depends on the instance, you just have to try different instances until you find one that works for you. For what it's worth I've found that dbzer0 works okay with Tor Browser.

brickfrog , 3 months ago

Sucks but not surprising. Broadcom has a history of doing things like this, ugh. Even with their paid products they jack up the price so much that the only customers that stick around are the business enterprise types that are locked in & can't easily migrate for various reasons.

brickfrog , 3 months ago

“But I was still embarrassed this weekend when I had to stick a straw in my wine glass.” Soda cans are doable; coffee mugs are not. The first must-have Vision Pro accessory is a very long metal straw

Or this works too

https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/pictrs/image/33b79fb4-9929-4ecc-b325-94df58fb9b5a.jpeg