100%. Home Assistant has proven to be incredibly useful in my house. My wife loves it for the laundry notifications, the fact that I essentially replaced Life360 with it (Traccar, really, but it ties into HA so nicely), and the automated lighting: our basement (the younger kids' play area), and themed lighting for the outdoor lights.
We've been fighting tangled toilet flapper chains over the last few years. The tangled chain keeps the flapper from closing, which causes the tank to continuously run into the bowl, which causes my water bill to skyrocket if gone unnoticed (we have 5 kids, 4 toilets, and the chains get tangled no matter what I do: new chain, longer chain, shorter chain, different type of chain/string/twine, etc... I blame the hard water). I finally got fed up, so I bought and installed a zigbee water level sensor for each toilet tank, then whipped up an automation which notifies us via Android's "alarm_stream" notification channel if a sensor has been dry for longer than a few minutes. That channel overrides DND, and I am going to add an entry to ping my HA Voice thing as well in case we don't have our phones on us.
Don't use Ubuntu as a server. Pretty much every server application will run happily on Debian, meanwhile Canonical keeps adding/changing shit that is Ubuntu-specific and has broken otherwise-functioning server installations. I may or may not have personal experience with this.
Ubuntu used to be the go-to, but Canonical is quickly becoming the poster child for Linux enshittification.
For servers, use Debian and never think about it again. Except the one or two times a year it should probably be rebooted because of kernel updates.
Fair enough. Signal does ship desktop clients for Windows, Mac, and even Linux; I'm actually using the Linux desktop client to chat with my wife right now.
The suggestion we’re replying to was to burn the fuse, not just pull it. How is that not maliciously damaging property?
Automotive fuses are specifically manufactured to be the first thing to fail. That's the entire reason fuses exist. Going from that to "maliciously damaging property" is an unreasonable leap.
If you’re that opposed to it, put your money where your mouth is and don’t take the free loaner. She would have seen it the moment she stepped into it, there’s nothing stopping her from returning the car.
Have you watched the video?
Objecting to surveillance in public is one thing, objecting to surveillance of private property that’s on loan to you and that you can return at any time is just self entitlement.
She is clearly not a car person. You would be absolutely shocked at how many people do not know the difference between an Audi Q7 (the loaner vehicle in question) and, say, a Toyota Highlander. Based on that, it's reasonable to assume that there is a spectrum of car knowledge, and she was clearly excited to drive "a brand new Q7" (again, straight from the video), which can very easily distract one from noticing such things.
Many manufacturers place all sorts of bulky equipment such as sensors, cameras (Subaru's "Eyesight" system), and other such things up at the top of the windshield, so at a glance to a non-car person who isn't already familiar with how the vehicle should look, it could have looked just like something integrated into the car straight from the factory. But again, we don't have that info. All she said was she didn't notice it for a few days.
There is a significant difference between "property destruction" and "not abiding by the terms of the contract". IMO this situation would fall under the latter, but watch the video in the linked article first to get the full context.
Facts based on the video:
The vehicle in question was a loaner vehicle from an Audi dealership, so not a "true" rental in that sense.
As with most loaner cars, these are offered as a convenience for the customer while their car is being serviced or repaired. In this case, her own car was in for a cooling system repair and had already been driving the loaner for a few days before noticing the camera.
Not everyone immediately notices otherwise "obvious" things like this since, again, this was a loaner car that she was excited to experience. This is stated plainly in the video.
There is an implication in the video that she was not informed about the camera. We don't know if she signed any paperwork that stated as much, since that info isn't given.
She acknowledges on camera that, had she known about the camera, she would've happily paid $700 for a traditional rental.
There is some expectation of privacy when inside a vehicle, and that includes rental vehicles. Being recorded by a camera installed in a rental/loaner/whatever vehicle that is lent to you based on a contract, without being informed of said camera, is a massive invasion of privacy, no matter how you slice it.
Something about Tailscale rubs me the wrong way. That "free" aspect, specifically. No company ever runs a free service without some sort of compromise somewhere.
Did you just go for 3.0, or did you do “baby steps” in between? (e.g. 1.138 > 2.0 > 3.0)
Pretty much that. Downloaded the latest compose.yml, copied all the relevant bits from my existing compose file to the fresh one (volumes, database/db credentials, etc), set the version to v2.0.0, and let 'er rip. Made sure it was playing nice, then checked all the changelogs up to 2.7.x (whatever the newest release was last week), set the version to v2, and updated it again. That was the newest release. Fast forward to this week, all I did was set the version to 'v3' and the update took without a problem.
Y'all know this article is from 2015, right?