chocolatera1n

I have often seen the abbreviation FAGMAN.

At some smaller companies I have worked at we used Terraform and Helm for everything. We had a strict policy that anything beyond dev had to be deployed by a robot owned by our security operations team. We already had multiple test and staging environments so that developers can remain unblocked. When an enterprise customer required a dedicated instance we created an additional set of environments from our existing templates.

The environments looked like: - platformcodename-$customerid-test0 - platformcodename-$customerid-test1 - platformcodename-$customerid-stage0 - platformcodename-$customerid-prod

and so on. At one of these places we were doing multi-cloud so each of these environments were a GCP Project and AWS subaccount. At another where we were on bare-metal put single-tenant customers in their own Kubernetes namespace (we were strong on genuine multi-tenancy), then we had a very special customer that we put on a dedicated Kubernetes cluster accompanied by a dedicated storage cluster.

If you have robust DevOps this should be an easy problem to solve. I have to admit upfront I am probably biased to what "robust DevOps" means because of how many people I have recently encountered with "DevOps" in their title who shy away from stuff DevOps has been traditionally expected to do. Maybe I should think up a different role description for myself.

https://webtorrent.io/faq and give users a simple tool to seed videos they like.

I run Firefox in its own network namespace with Firejail so I can more easily observe traffic from Firefox with Wireshark. Unexpected traffic gets added to nftables to be dropped and logged. I almost feel like automating this process, but then I consider that I'd probably be better off running a fork of Firefox under different stewardship in the first place. https://librewolf.net/ looks very interesting for this reason. The health of the Librewolf project is interesting to look into.

I used to really like Cory until I saw him give a talk at Burning Man. The talk wasn't bad but at the end of the talk he announced Q&A with "all gay, colored, or non-binary people ask questions first" and refused to take questions from anyone until all questions from "gay, colored, or non-binary people" were asked. While I can appreciate and respect that Cory himself is not heterosexual, the "social justice" flavored blatant discrimination over demographic details, arbitrarily excluding those with meaningful curiosity and intellect, and the manner in which he did it left me with pause before taking anything he says seriously.