Do the kvr hosts have hardware raid or software raid?
I know it's hotswappable drives
Just not sure about hardware or software
hardware for sure
I wish I knew why that happened
why what happened?
freenode network outages?
probably ddos..
said ping timeout on my end
you weren't the only one
I just assumed it was me or something close
hmm
kde_perry went out too
but looks like just you two this time :)
the other ones were earlier
http://www.macrumors.com/2016/03/16/apple-icloud-google-cloud-platform/
I hate these clouds
tcpdump no longer tells me what traffic is from what since it's practically all to AWS
could you look up the tcp stack and do some packet inspection to check URLs for GET requests and such
mkb^
they encrypt it all
I mean I have root and can get past that
heh i loved it when i had an adsl modem i could run tcpdump on
pity only really old ones work
it just seemed so right.  i can tcpdump now, but that's with pppoe..
hello
holaaaaa
Hello user that didn't stick around more than 2 minutes
anyone use spotify? If so - does anyone actually pay for it?
I would still be using iTunes - but its just so slow in comparison
on my first month trial at the moment
As someone not indoctrinated in the iOS ecosystem, iTunes really offers me nothing (especially on *nix)
I notice you had some irssi / itunes controller project in your github repo
does spotify have a *nix client?
I used to use OSX, ages ago. Kinda dropped off around 10.6
Spotify has a Linux binary client, and a web client (flash is required, I think.)
And as an Android, and Chromecast user - Spotify has Android clients and I can "cast" it to Chromecast devices
cool
it's nothing particularly special. You're just as well off, if not better, using the Windows client if you're on Windows.
are there any decent music players on unix comparable to foobar2000 yet?
Linux client tends to lag a bit feature-wise.
i never did like rhythmbox and the like
I really couldn't say since I have no experience with foobar2000
ahh
i.e. I don't know what makes foobar2000 so great :p
https://www.foobar2000.org/images/img/main-black.png
it's nice and simple, and it makes it easy to read and do stuff and play albums :)
whilst being light weight
Looks like it has a library manager built-in too?
kind of
you just build the library by adding directories
Sounds like VLC's scheme
but then you can exit and go back in
and it will retain that
also you can put more in there and it'll pick it up
Yeah iirc VLC has that. It's not the default playlist view, it has a library thinger.
hmm
heh prodigy
i remember prodigy :)
For the very minimal amount I need/use a media thing in linux, I'm happy with Rhythmbox. (I just use it to sync to a USB drive for the car)
i used to use mpg123/ogg123
and just play albums from command line
for some reason i found rhythmbox really slow
i wonder how big my music library is
it's all over the network..
well actually over the internet :)
only 144gb
but even that is just over 8 weeks long..
It's not noticeably slow for me. Takes about 5 seconds of showing a blank library before it shows my 340GB library, 101+ days
ahh i was thinking of scanning time
i suppose i don't need to keep rescanning
maybe i should try it again sometime
i've been just using foobar2000 on windows :)
(And said library is on an NFS share)
5 seconds is ok
it't not like i reboot every day :)
Also, Spotify is integrated into my receiver -- or failing a fancy receiver, a PS4 -- so I can tell the client to move my music playback from my laptop/headphones/etc to the receiver while I cook, AND I can still control playback using the receiver remote, my computer, or even the Spotify app on my phone.
that sounds hadny
i always wanted remote room audio
(My receiver isn't "fancy" - I'd say it was lower-mid-range at the time I bought it 3 years ago)
instead of having to turn the volume up and open doors :)
does mozilla like confusing their users
"the owner of this website has configured their website improperly. to protect you, firefox has not connected to this website."
that means the certificate didn't verify
if it's just configured improperly, why do you have to not connect?
firefox and chrome have both started getting strict with ssl certs.
and if it's an actual security problem, why do you say it's configured improperly?
they went from warning users to not letting users through
like i think you need tls support now?
the exception button still worked fortunately
ahh cool
i hit quite a few websites in google with a different domain configured
but it's the text that irritates me
so the cert will be for a different domain but still have the right content
they know 99% of that is not a real issue
and yet they keep making it harder to get through
itd epends what level of trust you need/want/desire from a site
like a bank having a misconfigured domain name would send alarm bells
some random internet forum or such not relaly
this guy's blog seems to be signed with let's encrypt
which apparently doesn't actually work
oh
i hit an issue with let's encrypt where it was working in chrome but not firefox
it may not be including the intermediate cert
oh that is configured improperly...
kind of, yeah
it's complicated
they have two legacy certs
to use to increase browser support while they're trying to get their root cert everywhere
that's my understanding
so not necessarily improperly configured
but less "openly" configured
you could say it's like allowing ssl support for legacy users
CN=Let's Encrypt Authority X1/O=Let's Encrypt/C=US
if you want the widest audience you need to, but if you are only expecting modern users it's not so bad
oh no.. https://letsencrypt.org/certs/isrg-keys.png
although it's a bit safer than allowing ssl users
The site just works on chrome right?
idk I don't have it installed
Ahh
Well it is a blog
https://blog.josefsson.org/2014/06/23/offline-gnupg-master-key-and-subkeys-on-yubikey-neo-smartcard/
I think you b are safe to just accept
I'm safe because I'm just reading it :)
Chrome Android bitches
it could have some sort of zero-day, but that's true of everything
Says invalid cert authority
I get so many random b letters on my phone
though I don't see why safari likes it
it actualyl works fine on chrome on pc too
maybe he hasn't noticed
you could tell him :)
curl doesn't like it either
I'm okay with the message. It's not technical and it's not supposed to be - it's supposed to be as simple as possible for the typical luddite to understand. The idea is to say there's a problem and that it's not the $lusers's fault.  22:15 <mkb> "the owner of this website has configured their website improperly. to protect you, firefox has not connected to this website."
(As someone that is technical support for their immediate family, who aren't exactly "bright" when it comes to computers...)
And frankly I'd rather a too-secure than a too-loose policy. Like mercutio said, if it's a bank or important online provider then that shit is serious. If it's Joe's Blog then maybe it's not a big deal, but I don't want my mother making that decision...
yes but it's supposed to happen when something is seriously wrong and it just acts like there's some minor configuration problem
SSH gives a much more urgent warning
``IT IS POSSIBLE THAT SOMEONE IS DOING SOMETHING NASTY! Someone could be eavesdropping on you right now (man-in-the-middle attack)!''
Because you don't want $luser calling the police over it...
And trust me, $lusers overreact in comical ways.
(Not making this up - personal experience)
oh I believe you
So the message can't be *too* alarming...
but he'll click the exception button
Not if he can't find it
it was right there
well
Well the Exception button is there, but to actually add the exception isn't clear
$luser generally can't find things which are right on the screen
and I admit to having done it hundreds of times
And last I recall, the exception button was hidden under "I Understand the Risks"
it's labeled Advanced -> Add exception -> Confirm here
nothing really indicates that there's a risk
maybe ``To protect your information from being stolen''
hmm maybe this is a different message
though that's silly too... unknown issuer and fake issuer would look the same
as far as I can tell from Google the most common reason to get that message is because you've installed an antivirus program
of course they MITM you
I really expected to find a bunch of screenshots with arrows before page two and I didn't so maybe it's not so hopeless
brycec: i'm ok with it being tight as long as it's easy to add exceptions :)
firefox to me seems better than it used to be