So this would be like mudering a bunch of people, hiding in cave to avoid prosecution and then claim that you are being tortured?

That's a bit silly in my view.

Yeah... my own setup for a hobby project of mine renew 30 days in advance but I don't think the way it is set up will try again tomorrow if it fails today.

I've got a systemd timer that tries to renew it once per day. It just aborts early if the existing cert has more than 45 days left in it.

i also have a daily cron. One of the renewals somehow repeatedly reissued the cert for 5 consecutive days without me noticing. For some reason the certificate was also nowhere to be found, and letsencrypt woulnd't let me manually renew the certificate because it had exceeded the limit of 5 issuances/month (or something of that sort). Thankfully the limitation is only for the exact same cert, so you can issue a new one for a slightly different set of domains without waiting for the period to pass.

Isn't that placing a lot of load on a free service?

With certbot, the check to see if certificates are close to expiry is done offline. So the service is only hit if a renewal is needed. The developers of certbot actually recommend that you schedule the cron twice a day.

EDIT: Actually I'm wrong. It also checks if the certificate was revoked via OCSP. However I can't imagine that it consumes much resources.

They're also different resources, and cacheable ones.

That free service has rate limits, which are presumably set to a sustainable level for them.

"Aborts early", in this case meaning before any network calls are made.

The default configuration for certbot in most distros is to attempt renewal twice a day

dehydrated is easy to set up this way, and has barely any dependencies.

I agree that people aren't looking for new social networks, but I do wonder about your view of disengaging from Facebook. I keep reading about it on HN but I'm not seeing it myself. I wonder if it's a US-centric view.

It's certainly becoming a more and more popular perspective with my demographic (20-something's in the UK). Most people haven't quite checked out just yet, but mainly use facebook for messenger and events, and are generally becoming:

1. Disengaged with the platform 2. Concerned about how much it knows about our lives

In the last few months, I've seen this go from something that only techies cared about to an increasingly mainstream point of view.

> 1. Disengaged with the platform 2. Concerned about how much it knows about our lives

Disengagement is an effect, not a cause, but I'd argue that the primary cause of disengagement is that the balance of dopamine increasing "happy" social networking experiences vs neutral or anger inducing negative experiences on social networks has shifted to the neutral/negative.

Even on the "happy" side, there's only so many recycled life-affirming aphorisms, or happy photos from other peoples' lives you can see in your newsfeed before you start to tune them out. On the negative side, produced content on social networks has turned toward the increasingly attention-grabbing, and occasionally even psychologically injurious. So if the happy stuff isn't making you so happy anymore, and you tire of the negative stuff, what do you do? Disengage.

According to Pew research, Facebook usage in the US has been flat since 2016, neither gaining nor losing overall.

However, the age breakdown of those users has changed a lot. Facebook has absolutely hemorrhaged users younger than about 45. The majority of American FB users are in the 46-76 year old range now, with 68% of US FB users aged 50 or older.

In the US, anyway, Facebook is for old farts and businesses.

Conveniently for Facebook, old farts and businesses have most of the money in the US.

> I wonder if it's a US-centric view.

Not US-specific, but it's absolutely a developed-country specific view. People are treating it more like they treat alcohol - fun to participate in every so often, but not healthy to do daily.

Might be a US-centric view, I live in Europe and I’ve started seeing less and less engagement on FB for some time now. Granted, me and my friends are in our late-30s, early-40s so we’re pretty busy with life generally speaking, but even so public sharing of stuff is at least an order of magnitude lower compared to 2012-2013. Most of the conversation has moved into private groups that are hosted by FB or WhatsApp.

Facebook usage is mpre healthy than its ever been in the U.S.

I think a lot of HN sentiment has to do with age and timing.

Lots of tech-savvy, younger people used it 10+ years ago when it was hot and semi-exclusive. Now their older and it's less hot and exclusive.

I really really want to use Firefox but I am still annoyed by the relative slowness compared to Chrome.

For me it is noticeable slower both when it comes to basic functionality such as opening new tabs, but also when it comes to the dev tools. When I want to use the dev tools I launch Chrome and use it from there just because I know it will be a more pleasant experience.

This doesn't seem to take into account that Access isn't just a database.

Isn't this just a direct quote of the 4th paragraph?

With China you know who is in charge. With Hackernews it is a bit more opaque.

I'm in charge of Hacker News. What would you like to know?

I think his point was that the following statement doesn't make much sense:

> This is most definitely a Good Thing, as it means for example no malicious extensions can be silently installed by malware etc.

Are you smiling because people who chose other options than you are having issues?

The people who made choices that enable these issues, while complaining about other options that prevent these issues?

One needn't badmouth iOS in order to use Android. Indeed, many who use Android don't know that iOS exists.

I think a large part of "the older generation" doesn't even understand that smartphones have software running on them called "android". My mom calls her Samsung Galaxy "iphone".

Or cannot afford an iPhone. Android brought smartphones to the masses. It's a lack of choice at that price point.

But what's the difference? You PAY gitlab in both instances and your leverage is the same. Do you want to be involved in reviewing their motherboards for spyware chips as well?