• 3 Posts
  • 19 Comments
Joined 2 months ago
cake
Cake day: February 3rd, 2026

help-circle
  • Honestly, I think your friend is right, it’s a question of economy of scale. As you scale up there will be less and less wasted resources in overhead. Once you reach the scale where you need hundreds or thousands (or hundreds of thousands) of servers to operate your site you’d likely be able to fairly efficiently dimension the amount of servers you have so that each server is pretty efficiently utilized. Youd only need to keep enough spare capacity to handle traffic bursts, which would also become smaller compared to the baseline load the larger your site becomes.

    Realistically most self-hosted setups will be mostly idle in terms of CPU capacity needed, with bursts as soon as the few users accesses the services.

    As for datacenters using optimized machines there is probably some truth to it. Looking at server CPUs they usually constrain power to each core to add more cores to the CPU. Compared to consumer CPUs where at least high-end CPUs crank the power to get the most single-core performance. This depends heavily on what kind of hardware you are self-hosting on though. If you are using a raspberry-pi your of course going to be in favor, same is probably true for miniPCs. However if you’re using your old gaming computer with an older high-end CPU, your power efficiency is very likely sub-optimal.

    As a “fun” fact/anecdote, I recently calculated that my home server which pulls ~160W comes out as 115kWh in a month. This is a bit closer than I would like to the 150-200 kWh I spend on charging my plug-in hybrid each month… To be fair though I had not invested much in power efficiency of this computer, running the old gaming computer approach and a lot of HDDs.

    That said there is plenty of other advantages with self-hosting, but I’m not sure the environmental angle works out as better overall.






  • It’s extremely unlikely that they are going to do any kind of deep traffic inspection in the router/modem itself. Inspecting network traffic is very intensive though and gives very little value since almost all traffic is encrypted/HTTPS today, with all major browsers even showing scare warnings if’s regular unencrypted HTTP. Potentially they could track DNS queries, but you can mitigate this with DNS over TLS or DNS over HTTPS (For best privacy I would recommend Mullvad: https://mullvad.net/en/help/dns-over-https-and-dns-over-tls)

    And of course, make sure that anything you are self-hosting is encrypted and using proper HTTPS certificates. I would recommend setting up a reverse proxy like Nginx or Traefik that you expose. Then you can route to different internal services over the same port based on hostname. Also make sure you have a good certificate from Letsencrypt




  • I’m like 90% sure that this post is AI Slop, and I just love the irony.

    First of all, the writing style reads a lot like AI… but that is not the biggest problem. None of the mitigations mentioned has anything to do with the Huntarr problem. Sure, they have their uses, but the problem with Huntarr was that it was a vibe coded piece of shit. Using immutable references, image signing or checking the Dockerfile would do fuck-all about the problem that the code itself was missing authentication on some important sensitive API Endpoints.

    Also, Huntarr does not appear to be a Verified Publisher at all. Did their status get revoked, or was that a hallucination to begin with?

    To be fair though the last paragraph does have a point, but for a homelab I don’t think it’s feasible to fully review the source code of everything you install. It would rather come down to being careful with things that are new and doesn’t have an established reputation, which is especially a problem in the era of AI coding. Like the rest of the *arr stack is probably much safer because it’s open source projects that have been around for a long time and had had a lot of eyes on it.


  • The free version is mainly just a number of user and device limit. Although the relaying service might be limited as well, but that should only matter if both of your clients have strict NAT, otherwise the Wireguard tunnels gets directly connected and no traffic goes through Netbirds managed servers.

    You can also self-host the control plane with pretty much no limitations, and I believe you no longer need SSO (which increased the complexity a lot for homelab setups).







  • I believe something like this is supposed to be a use-case of the digital EU Wallet. A website is supposed to be able to receive an attestation of a users age without nessecarily getting any other information about the person.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EU_Digital_Identity_Wallet

    Apparently the relevant feature is Electronic attestations of attributes (EAAs). I’m not really familiar with how it will be implemented though and I am a bit afraid of beurocratic design is going to fuck this up…

    Imo something like this would be magnitudes better than the current reliance of video identification. Not only is it much more reliable, it will also not feel nearly as invasive as having to scan your face and hope the provider doesn’t save it somewhere.


  • Sir. Haxalot@nord.pubtoMemes@sopuli.xyzwhat a coincidence
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    1 month ago

    Is there really a lot of AI generated doorbell camera videos out there? I can’t remember anything posted but then again maybe that just proves the point.

    Then again the low resolution does make it much easier to hide typical artefacts and issues so I don’t think it proves anything.




  • Maybe i misunderstand what you mean but yes, you kind of can. The problem in this case is that the user sends two requests in the same input, and the LLM isn’t able to deal with conflicting commands in the system prompt and the input.

    The post you replied to kind of seems to imply that the LLM can leak info to other users, but that is not really a thing. As I understand when you call the LLM it’s given your input and a lot of context that can be a hidden system prompt, perhaps your chat history, and other data that might be relevant for the service. If everything is properly implemented any information you give it will only stay in your context. Assuming that someone doesn’t do anything stupid like sharing context data between users.

    What you need to watch out for though, especially with free online AI services is that they may use anything you input to train and evolve the process. This is a separate process but if you give personal to an AI assistant it might end up in the training dataset and parts of it end up in the next version of the model. This shouldn’t be an issue if you have a paid subscription or an Enterprise contract that would likely state that no input data can be used for training.