Some more discussion on the topic: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/32570282

I didn’t say it wasn’t convenient. I said it was counter intuitive.

That’s pretty much the standard.

• On iPhones and iPads, swipe from the left to go back. In a book on such a device, swipe from the right to go forward.
• On eReaders, particularly Kindles, tap on the right side to go forward; tap on the left side to go back.
• On Android with gestures enabled, swipe from the left side to go back. Or… swipe from the right side to go back. Counter intuitive but apparently at least one person uses that.

Assuming OP has standard gestures enabled, they could still swipe from the left side.

And then what?

Only if you have a sign posted, reading “All ye who enter here forfeit thine selves – body, mind, spirit, and soul – to the owner of these lands, until such time as ye leave or are slain,” with the sign carved from stone by hand, with a willowbark dagger, blessed under the light of a blood moon, approximately eight feet tall, flanked by two shrubberies – that look nice and are not too expensive – and visible to all who enter, lit eternal by the captured light of the new moon.

I believe you set env vars on Windows through System Properties -> Advanced -> Environment Variables.

I believe you just need to set the env var OLLAMA_HOST to 0.0.0.0:11434 and then restart Ollama.

What OS is your server running? Do you have an Android phone or an iPhone?

In either case all you likely need to do is expose the port and then access your server by IP on that port with an appropriate client.

In Ollama you can expose the port to your local network by changing the bind address from 127.0.0.1 to 0.0.0.0

Regarding clients: on iOS you can use Enchanted or Apollo to connect to Ollama.

On Android there are likely comparable apps.

Please, enlighten me - how do you propose we use the term “AI” in a way that’s more useful than a definition that includes machine learning, large language models, and computer vision?

I doubt I’ll agree with your definition, but I’m curious to see how you would exclude machine learning, computer vision, LLMs, etc., from your definition. My assumption is that your definition is going to be either a derivative of “AI is anything computers can’t do yet” or based on pop culture / sci fi, but maybe you’ll surprise me.

To be clear, I’m a software engineer; I’m not speaking in sales speak. I’ve derived my understanding of the term from a combination of its historical context and how it’s used in both professional and academic contexts, not from marketing propaganda or from sci fi and pop culture. I’m certainly aware of the hype machine that’s ongoing, but there are also tons of fascinating advancements happening on a regular basis, and the term “AI” is at minimum a useful term to refer to technologies that leverage similar techniques.

it’s not ‘ai’, it’s just a poorly trained voice recognition system that’s trying to decipher any random person’s voice.

I’m baffled that you can say “It’s not ‘AI,’ it’s a machine learning powered speech to text system” with a straight face.

Even if we were to agree that ML-powered speech to text isn’t AI (and I don’t agree to that premise, for the record), there’s still the matter of processing the transcription to transform it into something that can be understood by the point of sale system - aka natural language processing. And while that NLP could be implemented without use of an LLM, given LLM’s current level of hype and the ease with which they can be shoved into any given product, I wouldn’t bet on Taco Bell execs approving such an approach, much less asking for it.

I’m a professional software engineer and I’ve been in the industry since before Kubernetes was first released, and I still found it overwhelming when I had to use it professionally.

I also can’t think of an instance when someone self-hosting would need it. Why did you end up looking into it?

I use Docker Compose for dozens of applications that range in complexity from “just run this service, expose it via my reverse proxy, and add my authentication middleware” to “in this stack, run this service with my custom configuration, a custom service I wrote myself or forked, and another service that I wrote a Dockerfile for; make this service accessible to this other service, but not to the reverse proxy; expose these endpoints to the auth middleware and for these endpoints, allow bypassing of the auth middleware if an API key is supplied.” And I could do much more complicated things with Docker if I needed to, so even for self-hosters with more complex use cases than mine, I question whether Kubernetes is the right fit.

Can’t Keepass also generate TOTPs?

Proton doesn’t know that your password is 64 characters long because the hash will be the same length regardless. They also don’t know if you’ve reused your password on other sites.

Do you have two factor authentication set up? A lot of sites - Proton included - institute stricter security measures if you do not have 2FA enabled.

Claiming that GTA is responsible for mass shootings is an example of what pro-gun activists do in order to deflect the blame off of guns.

You can’t just consider the cheese! You gotta look up all the ingredients!

• https://www.cancateat.food/food/bread
• https://www.cancateat.food/food/lettuce
• https://www.cancateat.food/food/tomato
• https://www.cancateat.food/food/mayonnaise
• https://www.cancateat.food/food/beef
• https://www.cancateat.food/food/cheese

Consensus: hold the tomato! Otherwise, if there’s no seasoning, everything else is acceptable in small amounts.

This is what I would try first. It looks like 1337 is the exposed port, per https://github.com/nightscout/cgm-remote-monitor/blob/master/Dockerfile

x-logging:
  &default-logging
  options:
    max-size: '10m'
    max-file: '5'
  driver: json-file

services:
  mongo:
    image: mongo:4.4
    volumes:
      - ${NS_MONGO_DATA_DIR:-./mongo-data}:/data/db:cached
    logging: *default-logging

  nightscout:
    image: nightscout/cgm-remote-monitor:latest
    container_name: nightscout
    restart: always
    depends_on:
      - mongo
    logging: *default-logging
    ports:
      - 1337:1337
    environment:
      ### Variables for the container
      NODE_ENV: production
      TZ: [removed]

      ### Overridden variables for Docker Compose setup
      # The `nightscout` service can use HTTP, because we use `nginx` to serve the HTTPS
      # and manage TLS certificates
      INSECURE_USE_HTTP: 'true'

      # For all other settings, please refer to the Environment section of the README
      ### Required variables
      # MONGO_CONNECTION - The connection string for your Mongo database.
      # Something like mongodb://sally:sallypass@ds099999.mongolab.com:99999/nightscout
      # The default connects to the `mongo` included in this docker-compose file.
      # If you change it, you probably also want to comment out the entire `mongo` service block
      # and `depends_on` block above.
      MONGO_CONNECTION: mongodb://mongo:27017/nightscout

      # API_SECRET - A secret passphrase that must be at least 12 characters long.
      API_SECRET: [removed]

      ### Features
      # ENABLE - Used to enable optional features, expects a space delimited list, such as: careportal rawbg iob
      # See https://github.com/nightscout/cgm-remote-monitor#plugins for details
      ENABLE: careportal rawbg iob

      # AUTH_DEFAULT_ROLES (readable) - possible values readable, denied, or any valid role name.
      # When readable, anyone can view Nightscout without a token. Setting it to denied will require
      # a token from every visit, using status-only will enable api-secret based login.
      AUTH_DEFAULT_ROLES: denied

      # For all other settings, please refer to the Environment section of the README
      # https://github.com/nightscout/cgm-remote-monitor#environment

To run it with Nginx instead of Traefik, you need to figure out what port Nightscout’s web server runs on, then expose that port, e.g.,

services:
  nightscout:
    ports:
      - 3000:3000

You can remove the labels as those are used by Traefik, as well as the Traefik service itself.

Then just point Nginx to that port (e.g., 3000) on your local machine.

—-

Traefik has to know the port, too, but it will auto detect the port that a local Docker service is running on. It looks like your config is relying on that feature as I don’t see the label that explicitly specifies the port.

Thank you! That gives me a starting point that should be easy to look up!

Why is 255 off limits? What is 127.0.0.0 used for?

To clarify, I meant that specific address - if the range starts at 127.0.0.1 for local, then surely 127.0.0.0 does something (or is reserved to sometimes do something, even if it never actually does in practice), too.

Advanced setup would include a reverse proxy to forward the requests from the applications port to the internet

I use Traefik as my reverse proxy, but I have everything on subdomains for simplicity’s sake (no path mapping except when necessary, which it generally isn’t). I know 127.0.0.53 has special meaning when it comes to how the machine directs particular requests, but I never thought to look into whether Traefik or any other reverse proxy supported routing rules based on the IP address. But unless there’s some way to specify that IP and the IP of the machine, it would be limited to same device communications. Makes me wonder if that’s used for any container system (vs the use of the 10, 172.16-31, and 192.168 blocks that I’ve seen used by Docker).

Well this is another advanced setup but if you wanted to segregate two application on different subnets you can. I’m not sure if there is a security benefit by adding the extra hop

Is there an extra hop when you’re still on the same machine? Like an extra resolution step?

I still don’t understand why .255 specifically is prohibited. 8 bits can go up to 255, so it seems weird to prohibit one specific value. I’ve seen router subnet configurations that explicitly cap the top of the range at .254, though - I feel like I’ve also seen some that capped at .255 but I don’t have that hardware available to check. So my assumption is that it’s implementation specific, but I can’t think of an implementation that would need to reserve all the .255 values. If it was just the last one, that would make sense - e.g., as a convention for where the DHCP server lives on each network.

Why is 255 off limits? What is 127.0.0.0 used for?