sarjalim

I pay for Bitwarden premium and the big thing for me is the ability to use it for 2FA/TOTP right from the browser extension (for sites where I feel convenience mostly trumps hardened security). It’s glorious that Bitwarden autofills username and password, and then auto-copies the current 2FA code to your clipboard so you can just paste it immediately, instead of needing to pull up your phone and authenticator app to fetch a code, or check your email/texts for a code.

I also use Connect. My phone is a Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra, I think it has to do with the emoji collection on the device rather than a specific app.

When you figure out how to set up Caddy, please send me a PM… I’ve tried and given up, but probably managed to misconfigure or misunderstand something.

For outside access I use Ngrok so I don’t have to bother with router settings. Probably isn’t recommended, but it was easy to set up and has worked flawlessly for me for years.

Lol I hear ya 😅 But great that you got it to work for your setup. Best of luck with your projects!

If I understand correctly (and I’m not 100% sure I do), localhost in a Docker container lives in it’s own little network which is not the host’s network.

The container is its own localhost, which has its own ports (which is why you have to map an internal localhost port to a host PC localhost port for every container you wish to access). This means that Prowlarr in your case, has no idea what localhost:4666 should be since in Prowlarr’s localhost universe there exists nothing on that port. To access what the host knows of ports (instead of the container), you have to write the host’s address from inside the Prowlarr container.

I hope that wasn’t impossible to follow 😅

Now that I think about it (haven’t tried myself though) you could possibly add the mapping of port 4666:4666 to the Prowlarr Docker compose setup and then use localhost:4666 to access qBittorrent from inside Prowlarr.

Try with the local network IP of the host PC/VM instead (192.168.x.x), you have to use that for most applications. Remember that localhost/127.0.0.1 means something different inside a Docker container than it does outside it…

deleted by creator

Unfortunately I don’t think it’s just Britain. I’ve seen this same sort of mentality gain traction all over Europe, my own Nordic country as well. Although Britain does seem to have a headstart into conservative dystopia.

It’s not in the headline that they are paying the same salary though, which was the question.

What are you on about, we were asked to have face masks on public transport, in grocery stores, in hospitals etc. Lots of selfish people refused to have the decency to protect others from themselves, but still.

We had worse outcomes compared to Norway, Finland, Denmark. Not necessarily due to the inability of people like you to wear masks, but nothing to brag about.

As a swede: your opinion is in the minority, and it’s embarrassing that you have to invoke some sort of “Swedish superiority” mentality. Please stop importing the very worst ideas from the US.

I mean, that’s possible. But I can view all the comment replies to a top-level comment (using any sorting) when using Jerboa instead of Connect. So this issue seems to be specific to Connect unfortunately!

I wrote as a top-level comment elsewhere here, but I can see some replies to a comment thread if I use Top sorting and another set of replies if I use Hot… if caching were the issue I don’t think I’d be able to view different comment subthreads depending on sorting.

I had this issue in a recent comment thread. Weirdly, the “invisible” set of comments show up if I change sorting from Top to Hot for example, so I had to switch between sortings to answer different subcomment threads.

One particular reply I got, I couldn’t see with either sorting: I could see it in my inbox but not view it in Connect. I had to use Jerboa to see and answer it. Very frustrating and strange.

Clarification: Jerboa shows all comment replies to a top-level comment using any sorting.

I think every member of society is entitled to a minimum level of respect. Some groups of people in society face more discrimination and harassment than others due to some common attribute they have, and my opinion is that they should be legally protected from that.

You are in your rights to think Islam is a cancer, you are free to protest Islam publicly, whenever and wherever. The difference is that your critique of Islam is legal and valid, but you can’t target Muslims. Certain actions combined with a place and time can turn valid critique into incitement.

I actually agree, it’s a problem. As other people also argued here, the existing law is perhaps too fuzzy even though I personally agree with the sentiment (and do believe it is applicable as-is in the recent Quran cases).

Laws can sometimes be intentionally written broadly as to cover future unanticipated cases, but for the recent events it’s not clear what is covered and what isn’t covered. That has to be tried in court to set a precedent then, and that hasn’t been done. And part of why it hasn’t been done seems to be that the prosecutors are unsure of how their case will go in court, so they choose not to prosecute… At least that’s how I have understood it.

I mean, as a fellow atheist I don’t disagree. What I’m saying is that there are groups that are targeted (in Swedish society) specifically for their affiliation with a religion, their sexual orientation etc. Protesting religions is fine and IS protected speech.

But certain actions are only meant to provoke, disrespect and incite. The Iraqi guy is well within his rights to protest and criticize Islam; the question here is whether the manner of his “protest” was protected speech or if choosing that specific action, time and place for his protest, all taken together, tip the scales from valid and protected religious critique into something else. If the main intent was to incite, disrespect and provoke, it might not be protected speech.

That said, I’m not a fan of most religions. Specifically when religion is used as a justification to impose prescriptive and restrictive rules on others both within and outside of that religion (pro life, gender roles, prescriptive clothing like Muslim head coverings, prescriptive rules regarding birth control or sex, discrimination or persecution of LGBTQ people etc).

No problem. It’s good to have well reasoned, civilized debates- we don’t have to agree at the end!

I mean, that’s a matter of personal opinion (and you are entitled to yours). Legality aside, I personally think some groups should have special protections as they are often targets of discrimination or harassment specifically because of their affiliation with a certain group. That includes race/ethnicity, religion, sexuality, gender identity etc.

Of course, these people are also individually protected from harassment and discrimination through other laws as you say, but the incitement law protects them as a group and from being targeted in certain ways. You are allowed to publicly protest against Judaism, but not to publicly wear swastikas (a symbol of the horror of the Holocaust).

It would arguably be worse, since you are allowed to wear swastikas in private. You cannot wear them about town, that’s legally considered a hate crime.

We already have that law, so the only thing up for debate is interpretation? Which legal experts are busy with debating now in public discourse in Swedish media, with no clear consensus except that it should be tried in court. I understand what you mean by slippery slope, but if everything is a slippery slope we would never be able to legislate anything. And let me remind you, both Sweden and the US have already imposed certain limits to the right to free speech. Defamation, for example, is not protected speech.

I disagree that a public school isn’t a public place, but you’re technically right. It doesn’t really matter in the eyes of the Swedish law though, arguably it would be worse legally if the student had carved the swastika on a public playground outside, rather then in a semi-public spot in a school.