If you’re using containers for everything anyways, the distro you use doesn’t much matter.

If Ubuntu works for you and switching away would mean significant effort, I see no reason to switch outside of curiosity.

The operating system is explicitly not virtualised with containers.

What you’ve described is closer to paravirtualisation where it’s still a separate operating system in the guest but the hardware doesn’t pretend to be physical anymore and is explicitly a software interface.

Do you have a media center and/or server already? It’s a bit overkill for the former but would be well suited as the latter with its dedicated GPU that your NAS might not have/you may not want to have in your NAS.

Glad I could save you some money :)

NixOS packages only work with NixOS system. They’re harder to setup than just copying a docker-compose file over and they do use container technology.

It’s interesting how none of that is true.

Nixpkgs work on practically any Linux kernel.

Whether NixOS modules are easier to set up and maintain than unsustainably copying docker-compose files is subjective.

Neither Nixpkgs nor NixOS use container technology for their core functionality.
NixOS has the nixos-container framework to optionally run NixOS inside of containerised environments (systemd-nspawn) but that’s rather niche actually. Nixpkgs does make use of bubblewrap for a small set of stubborn packages but it’s also not at all core to how it works.

Totally beside the point though; even if you don’t think NixOS is simpler, that still doesn’t mean containers are the only possible mean by which you could possibly achieve “easy” deployments.

Also without containers you don’t solve the biggest problems such as incompatible database versions between multiple services.

Ah, so you have indeed not even done the bare minimum of research into what Nix/NixOS are before you dismissed it. Nice going there.

as robust in terms of configurations

Docker compose is about the opposite of a robust configuration system.

This is a false dichotomy. Just because containers make it easy to ship software, doesn’t mean other means can’t be equally easy.

NixOS achieves a greater ease of deployment than docker-compose and the like without any containers involved for instance.

I would not buy a CPU without seeing a real-world measurement of idle total system power consumption if you’re concerned about energy (and therefore cost) efficiency in any way. Especially on desktop platforms where manufacturers historically do not care one bit about efficiency. You could easily spend many hundred € every year if it’s bad. I was not able to find any measurements for that specific CPU.

Be faster at transcoding video. This is primarily so I can use PhotoPrism for video clips. Real-time transcoding 4K 80mbps video down to something streamabke would be nice. Despite getting QuickSync to work on the Celeron, I can’t pull more than 20fps unless I drop the output to like 640x480.

That shouldn’t be the case. I’d look into getting this fixed properly before spending a ton of money for new hardware that you may not actually need. It smells like to me that encode or decode part aren’t actually being done in hardware here.

What codec and pixel format are the source files?
How quickly can you decode them? Try running ffmpeg manually with VAAPI decode, -c copy, and a null sink on the files in question.

What codec are you trying to transcode to? Apollo lake can’t encode HEVC 10 bit. Try encoding a testsrc (testsrc=duration=10:size=3840x2160:rate=30) to AVC 10 bit or HEVC 8 bit.

Have you considered using Oracle’s free VPS tier? Should be more than powerful enough to host a read-only Lemmy instance.

It’s not ideal but if you’re short on money, it’s better than having your online data rot.

Depends on how many other users are using the same proxy. If you host piped for yourself using your home internet connection, Google will absolutely know who is watching the video.

Yes, it’s called email. Run

git send-email

as Linus intended.

Paperless for keeping track of text written on the dead trees which companies keep sending me instead of email.

Actualbudget for keeping track where the money goes.

That’s for Jerboa to fix. It’s valid markdown.

Depends on how the cards implement HDMI. Intel cards notably have a DP->HDMI converter chip on-board requiring no software-side support for HDMI.

The actual text for reference:

Video games in the form of computer programs, embodied in lawfully acquired physical or downloaded formats, and operated on a general-purpose computer, where circumvention is undertaken solely for the purpose of allowing an individual with a physical disability to use software or hardware input methods other than a standard keyboard or mouse.

That explicitly only applies to physically disabled people. Yuzu is not specifically targetted at providing a different input method (at all) and certainly not solely for the physically disabled.

That exception is not relevant to this case.

The dumps are just that: Dumps; 1:1 copies.

The tools don’t decrypt anything; that happens within Yuzu. Why else would users need to provide the prod keys to Yuzu?

It’s illegal to circumvent copy protection under the DMCA (something I wholeheartedly disagree with), but it’s not illegal to make something that can be used to circumvent copy protection.

It is explicitly illegal to produce any thing whose purpose it is to circumvent DRM:

(1) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that—
(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof;

I’m telling you, that law is mental.

In fact, there are exemptions to that provision and one of them states that circumventing copy protection in order to play a video game using assistive technologies is legal.

Could you point that specific exception in the law? I can’t find it.

Link for convenience: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-105publ304/pdf/PLAW-105publ304.pdf

They’re using the DMCA to say that because Yuzu lets someone circumvent their encryption (which is illegal, but shouldn’t be), that’s the same as Yuzu circumventing their encryption.

Yes, yes they are. That’s how the DMCA works. It’s mental.

You can download and view the latest Yuzu source code for free and do practically whatever you want with it (GPLv3), including building and running it.

What paying via Patreon provides you is access to early access builds of the software. You’re paying for the convenience of them compiling the latest version of the software for you.

That’s rather clear evidence that they dumped their own ROM and distributed that. Since they own the rights to that ROM, they’re not distributing it illegally though. They can dump and distribute their ROMs all they want; they own the rights to them.

Yuzu doesn’t include any form of tooling that breaks encryption

You cannot state that with certainty. That’s the problem.

Yuzu does indeed include a method to use the Switch’s production keys (which you must dump yourself) to decrypt the games. Whether this constitutes effective DRM is not a question that can easily be answered and must be decided by a court on a case-by-case basis.
This will be what the case will hinge on: Is Ninty’s scheme effective DRM?

I would say no because symmetric encryption with a publicly known key may aswell be no encryption at all but that’s not my decision to make.

They aren’t facilitating it, the user has to provide all of that chain of the emulation on their own.

Um, no. The emulator is doing the decryption on its own. All the user does is provide the prod keys and unmodified ROM.