

Jesus Christ this is such a toxic attitude…. If you want people to take you seriously I don’t think being an ass about it and rage-baiting people is the right strategy.


Jesus Christ this is such a toxic attitude…. If you want people to take you seriously I don’t think being an ass about it and rage-baiting people is the right strategy.


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).


That seems to be the terms for the personal edition of Microsoft 365 though? I’m pretty sure the enterprise edition that has the features like DLP and tagging content as confidential would have a separate agreement where they are not passing on the data.
That is like the main selling point of paying extra for enterprise AI services over the free publicly available ones.
Unless this boundary has actually been crossed in which case, yes. It’s very serious.


That is kind of assuming the worst case scenario though. You wouldn’t assume that QA can read every email you send through their mail servers ”just because ”
This article sounds a bit like engagement bait based on the idea that any use of LLMs is inherently a privacy violation. I don’t see how pushing the text through a specific class of software is worse than storing confidential data in the mailbox though.
That is assuming that they don’t leak data for training but the article doesn’t mention that.
Nah man, this is just some divisive bullshit. How many people have you converted by leading with telling them they’re getting cucked? I think it’s a much greater chance that if you ’accuse’ someone of ”cuckloading” they will just become defensive.
I am also a bit impressed how quickly you brought US politics, slavery and world wars into a discussion about online privacy.