That's probably not a popular opinion here, but: parents do not have a right to their child. If the child was cool with this, then that is the important part (and from what I read I'd guess he would be).

Let's posit it the other way around: a deeply religious pair of parents raises a kid that ends up being strongly anti-religion and comes to some "fame" due to that. Would you describe those celebrating that kid as "cunts" as well? And if not: why?

And no, I'm not religious myself and think a lot of that stuff is stupid and much of it is dangerous, but "those parents deserve better" is an argument that's used in exactly the opposite way in other areas: to oppress kids that don't "submit to the norm" that their parents think are best.

I personally prefer podman, due to its rootless mode being "more default" than in docker (rootless docker works, but it's basically an afterthought).

That being said: there's just so many tutorials, tools and other resources that assume docker by default that starting with docker is definitely the less cumbersome approach. It's not that podman is signficantly harder or has many big differences, but all the tutorials are basically written with docker as the first target in mind.

In my homelab the progression was docker -> rootless docker -> podman and the last step isn't fully done yet, so I'm currently running a mix of rootless docker and podman.

Somewhere a monkey paw finger curls and you're moved to the timeline where the world is in a nuclear winter ...

if you see anyone stealing food for themselves, then no, you didn't.

Or at least honor the ancients by using Impact font with a black outline. There's a reason why that was/is that is used heavily.

Realistically most adventure parties leave many disabled people (and beasts) in their wake...

This is also by the author of Uptime Kuma, which explains the similarity in UI.

In case you're not joking: It's very common in Europe to abbreviate the last name of non-public figures when reporting on them. So it's a kind of anonymization.

On the other hand: that guy was the founding member of a party, so could be argued to be a (minor) public figure. But I guess this specific report is not directly tied to that "work" of his, so it could be considered in the private sphere.

Aber ist das nicht der Punkt? Beides ist extrem gefährlich und nur eins davon ist verboten.

Keine Angst, in ein paar Jahren ist von dem Schaden eh nichts mehr zu sehen ...

My goal is to set up my services so that they can mostly live with limited connectivity. Because either my phone has no internet or my at-home ISP craps its pants, but either one will happen sometime.

So it's more about being able to gracefully resume than "perfect access".

In other words: if something stops syncing or I can't access some specific service that's mostly acceptable to me. What isn't acceptable is if the syncing got into a state that needed intervention to fix or one of my services didn't come back when service is restored.

So in a sense resilience is more important than 100% accessibility.

The small number of exceptions (mostly password saves and other minor bits) I make sure to actively sync to my personal devices so that if my selfhosted stuff goes away I'm not 100% stranded.

The usual primary talking point is that it was developed "too fast", which is of course ignoring a bunch of very important "details". But explaining why that is wrong takes multiple sentences, but shouting out the misrepresentation that pulls people in can be done in a second.