Wow that’s impressive! I tend to be very value oriented, and at the sub $5 price, you’re getting so little that I feel like you’re mostly paying for a public IP and bandwidth. And of course selfhosting your compute is usually a win, especially if you already have something laying around. So I just pay the public IP tax for a reverse proxy and home host it all. I would probably go with a cheaper VPS for my reverse proxy but I need the confidence it’ll hold up to multiple friends Plex streaming.

Yeah if you aren’t down to publicly expose your IP address / port forward, the cheapest way I can think of still involves a several $/mo VPS that just reverse proxies home to a more powerful PC. That’s what I do since I’m behind CGNAT.

This is why it’s important to get one with an adjustable emissivity, so you can adjust it to whatever material you are measuring. Or you can stick some electrical tape on what you want to measure, 3M super 88 is 0.96 so I just set my fluke to 0.96 and stick that shit everywhere I want to measure.

Not only is there the issue of getting approval from the video creators, there’s the issue that most PeerTube servers aren’t ready to handle a huge influx in uploads, as this would likely be a bulk operation.

Personally I think mirroring YouTube content would be more viable once ActivityPods lands and is integrated with PeerTube, which could potentially let you self host your PeerTube account data while still being part of a separate “home instance”, which would greatly help with the storage issue for PeerTube as we could all bring our own storage.

Sure, but you also don’t need to give them full benefit of the doubt just because that’s how the court operates. It’s a perfectly reasonable stance to not believe their claim that they loopholed the law by not seeding, which I don’t think is contradictory with supporting piracy. And comparing the mass ingestion of human creative work into an exploitative AI model to an individual person pirating for human consumption as if someone who is against one must be against the other is absurd.

My argument is that just because the courts may give Meta the benefit of the doubt, it doesn’t mean that you need to as well. It shouldn’t be any surprise to you that you’re getting the response you’re getting here when you seem to be bending over backwards to find any excuse to give Meta a pass.

And no - wanting Meta to be fully investigated on the basis that they most likely did break the law has no bearing on wanting to oppress the enemy lol.

I’m not a court so absent any actual evidence from Meta, I can assume whatever I want. Meta can suck a dick.

It’s a distinction without a difference, because there is no reason to believe Meta’s word that they blocked seeding when downloading. So whether it’s always or usually makes no difference, because in either case, Meta should not be given the benefit of the doubt.

Both things can be true at the same time - you can get a letter for leeching only AND usually when leeching you are also seeding. I don’t know what your issue is with that statement.

I don’t know if this is news to you or not, but while you are leeching, you are also seeding.

I am the reader and I have made the determination that you are wrong. Plenty of people get letters for leeching only - just your presence in the swarm is all it takes, and that’s all they check for before sending you a letter - at least in the US.

Not really, as long as your VPN setup is solid (assuming you need it to avoid letters) and you don’t mind the bandwidth usage. I have some ratios in the 500s