I ended up getting several Tasmota based devices from https://www.athom.tech/. Run your own RabbitMQ like service to control them, and no internet needed. They're super cheap, open-source, and flashable with your own firmware if you want.
If you watch [this Climate Town video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CkgCYPe68Q), then absolutely not, the disposable fast fashion we have today is not better. It's cheaper, but it's not higher quality, it requires trans-continental shipping, and it absolutely gets thrown away in ridiculous amounts.
Overall, it's worse in just about every metric other than "I can get this fun shirt online at 2am for $6."
Is there anything like omnom or karakeep that allows for storing things without having to manually bookmark or add them to the system? I want any URL I hit to have its content sent to my service so that I can search it later.
This looks like what web developers have been waiting literally decades for. Possibly replacing (eventually) a bunch of JS libraries to make this all do what we want.
I don't have Chrome installed, but I'm curious how it handles multi-select fields, as I didn't see that in the example video.
I expect they're thinking they should ship something that works, and covers some use cases, and gradually improve it over time to support more use cases.
They've screwed this up several times by shipping too soon and then having to backpedal. The web is not something you want to screw up because they don't own every website in existence.
I was just wondering how people do a custom <select multiple> now. I guess they make it screen-reader-only and then have aria-hidden checkboxes for everyone else.
"Select multiple" is just a list of checkboxes. The missing part (which is also missing from select) is just the filtering.
I am not holding my breath for a decent "select multiple" field. It's been the same crap for decades and browsers could have fixed it long again without waiting for spec - it's just a "replaced element", but they don't care.
The fun part is that it looks amazing on Safari iOS (and QED it's rendered as a list of checkboxes)
I commented on this a few weeks ago. There are two future components under development that look to support selecting multiple options in a dropdown format.
Search textbox: would be supported under the more customizable Combobox element
Select Multiple: both the Enhanced Select and Combobox plan to support this
Not necessarily. I've seen more than one production app with a custom filtering dropdown list of items with checkboxes.
I built a couple variants of that in React at my last gig for the company's design system. The keyboard nav was complex... that component is one of the work artifacts that I'm most proud of.
Incremental improvement is great, but I do want to know what they're thinking here.
They didn't mention it in the blog post that multiple isn't supported. Its perfectly fine if it is not supported right now. It would be great if they acknowledged that up front to set expectations accordingly.
For instance, if its explicitly not supported, then I won't be left wondering if its a bug or a misunderstanding of the implementation etc.
Communication would be really good here. I'm all for incremental improvement, I think we need more of it.
Doesn't mean there shouldn't be better communication about it.
> This looks like what web developers have been waiting literally decades for.
Count me in. Most times it didn't matter to me but there were some cases when I wanted or needed them to have a specific style matching other elements and, yes, I could only do it -to the best I knew- with JS.
React has been around for 11 years. The amount of stuff that's online that tells you to do something with it one way when the react devs tell you to do it another is _astonishing_. And that's just from the last few years.
Or take webpack that's been around for 13 years. The way things are set up even within the last few years have changed dramatically.
If Apache configs moved as much as these systems did, no one would use Apache.
imo, the Webpack situation is worse. React's evolution has been more incremental/cumulative. Best practices evolve, but not too much truly needs to be forgotten.
I don't understand "Plex is no longer going to offer remote playback for personal media as a free service"
What cost does Plex incur when I watch something from my friends server? They're not footing the bill for bandwidth that I can tell, so why is there going to be a cost associated with this beyond "we can"?
The special thing about plex for me is it is effortless. I run the server, and without any port forwarding it just works. Then my in-laws can sign up, and just like that they can stream that movie I totally own legitimately... And I don't need to walk them through entering my IP, a port number. They just sign up and it works.
All of that has a cost. It costs money to maintain, it costs money to develop, it costs money to host.
It's a commercial product. They have been inching more towards monetizing their product for a long time. Being able to pay for a lifetime is a huge win imo. I wish more companies offered that.
Before folks get the wrong idea, this isn’t true. Plex uses universal plug and play to open ports in your firewall, unless you explicitly configure plex manually. At that point you still have an open port but you get to pick it.
That being said, the remote access functionality plex provides is very nice. The shocking bit but to me is that they are pricing remote play at 20$/yr. As far as I can tell you only use plex infrastructure when a direct connection can’t be made. I’m my experience that’s seldom.
Plex does operate a few services that 'free' (or any) streaming may rely on depending on circumstances. Aside from auth, Plex clients that aren't able to discover the server instance locally rely on a Plex-hosted webservice to enumerate available servers. Additionally, there is a client-side config option that allows low resolution streams (720p is the ceiling, I believe) to be proxied via Plex's infrastructure. This setting is referred to as 'indirect connection', if I recall correctly.
They also provide the HTTPS certificate allowing for secure communication, along with the DNS infrastructure for that.
That is, your host gets a DNS entry along the lines of 1.2.3.4.something.plex.com, where 1.2.3.4 is your Plex server's public IP, and they have a deal with a cert issuer so they can get valid certs for that hostname.
edit: It's Let's Encrypt these days[1], was sure it wasn't that when it started, but it's been a while.
Whatever it is, it's too much. I remember experiencing my first "Plex outage" and wondering why Plex is architected in a way that a failure on their end can stop me from streaming local media on my own PC to the same PC hosting the files, and store my watch history/metadata in a local database on my own PC.
That almost made me switch to Jellyfin, but every time I look into Jellyfin I hear people saying it's not quite fully cooked, but that's been years now they've been saying that. So I stick with the devil I know.
Without any other experience with this feature of Plex, I would've assumed that they'd proxy the data so it would work seamlessly with NAT and CGNAT setups without additional user config, but I have no idea if that's actually the case.
They're not really proxying it, but they do assist with NAT hole-punching and you're probably using their authentication system for managing permissions.
That this is absolutely a "because we can" situation. If it is using any significant resources of their own to serve it remotely, that's because they engineered it that way.
Things that were added in the last 10 years off the top of my head:
* 10 years of updates to the iOS/Android/GoogleTV/AppleTV/Mac/Windows/etc clients (that doesn't come for free)
* OpenSubtitle search built in
* Intro detection
* Credit detection
* Watch Together
* LiveTV/DVR support
* PlexAmp
* PlexDash
And more that I'm not thinking of.
You can say "I don't care about those features", which is a tired take IMHO, but there are plenty of features they have added to keep up with the online streaming platforms.
> What cost does Plex incur when I watch something from my friends server? They're not footing the bill for bandwidth that I can tell, so why is there going to be a cost associated with this beyond "we can"?
Agreed. The article says:
> Plex says that it needs to raise prices to keep up with rising costs, and that the added funds will ensure that Plex is able to keep developing new features.
and yet they also offer a lifetime pass. If I were considering paying a company that just did this, then I'm not sure I'd have much faith in the lifetime value of that lifetime pass.
Just as a reference point. I bought Plex Pass Lifetime in 2014 (June) for $74.99. So I've already had just shy of 11 years of value for $74.99 which is an absolute steal (~$0.50/mo and it only gets better as time goes on).
"Past performance is not indicative of future results." and all of that but just wanted to provide an example.
I remember getting a Voodoo5 AGP, not knowing at the time that AGP and PCI were different. I couldn't use it for the first couple of months that I had it, and then upgraded the motherboard to one that could. I remember originally running a Gigabyte GA-6BXD with Dual Pentium IIIs, but I don't remember what I upgraded to that let me run the Voodoo5.
The V5 was the largest card I'd ever seen that wasn't a motherboard, and it ran every game I wanted to play for years!
This book is amazing. Two useful bits that really helped me were mastic gum and mouth tape. Both of them made it much easier for me to breath through my nose at night and avoid waking up with a dry mouth in the morning.
There are also some interesting bits on breathwork and the scientific aspects of it. I was able to use those techniques to temporarily lower my heart rate to 45 BPM during meditation.
I was surprised at how quickly my rhr came down after I started cycling more even though I've never been very active in my life.
It also (I think!) helped with my sleep apnea/general sleep problems, and I've always assumed a good bit of that was literally just being better at breathing.
That's also why humans have maybe the weakest teeth among the mammals ... and a narrow mouth which caused us to lose certain teeth we no longer have nowadays.
In an interview with Joe Rogan, James Nestor suggested to encourage our kids to eat non soft food daily.
Guy sounds like a crockpot like half of Joe Rogan's guests these days, but isn't it obvious which foods make you chew or not? Compare yogurt to a bowl of vegetables.
reply