Dran

the best way to learn is by doing!

I just built my own automation around their official documentation; it’s fantastic.

https://www.wireguard.com/#conceptual-overview

https://www.wireguard.com/install/

https://www.wireguard.com/quickstart/

vyatta and vyatta-based (edgerouter, etc) I would say are good enough for the average consumer. If we’re deep enough in the weeds to be arguing the pros and cons of wireguard raw vs talescale; I think we’re certainly passed accepting a budget consumer router as acceptably meeting these and other needs.

Also you don’t need port forwarding and ddns for internal routing. My phone and laptop both have automation in place for switching wireguard profiles based on network SSID. At home, all traffic is routed locally; outside of my network everything goes through ddns/port forwarding.

If you’re really paranoid about it, you could always skip the port-forward route, and set up a wireguard-based mesh yourself using an external vps as a relay. That way you don’t have to open anything directly, and internal traffic still routes when you don’t have an internet connection at home. It’s basically what talescale is, except in this case you control the keys and have better insight into who is using them, and you reverse the authentication paradigm from external to internal.

Talescale proper gives you an external dependency (and a lot of security risk), but the underlying technology (wireguard) does not have the same limitation. You should just deploy wireguard yourself; it’s not as scary as it sounds.

Fail2ban and containers can be tricky, because under the hood, you’ll often have container policies automatically inserting themselves above host policies in iptables. The docker documentation has a good write-up on how to solve it for their implementation

https://docs.docker.com/engine/network/packet-filtering-firewalls/

For your usecase specifically: If you’re using VMs only, you could run it within any VM that is exposing traffic, but for containers you’ll have to run fail2ban on the host itself. I’m not sure how LXC handles this, but I assume it’s probably similar to docker.

The simplest solution would be to just put something between your hypervisor and the Internet physically (a raspberry-pi-based firewall, etc)

I think the debate is about what a reasonable class is. I don’t think that an appendage, or identity for that matter, is a reasonable proxy for capability class. In my mind you really have to go one of two ways.

You either make everything class-less (think UFC 1) where all weights, sizes, abilities, genetics compete for a singular title

Or

You make science-based classes, based around whatever the best proxy for capabilities are (testosterone, chromosomes, height, weight, body fat percentage, some combination of the former, etc)

If you use nothing as a proxy, there would be a lot of people unable to compete but it would at least be unequivocally “fair”. If you use science-based capability classes you would have a wider range of “fair-ish” competitions, but there might be some weird overlap where some men, some women, and those in-between bridge accepted norms.

do you know why they’re illegal? is there some danger to them?

+1 for cmk. Been using it at work for an entire data center + thousands of endpoints and I also use it for my 3 server homelab. It scales beautifully at any size.

You would expose a single port to multiple vlans, and then bind multiple addresses to that single physical connected interface. Each service would then bind itself to the appropriate address, rather than “*”

Always happy to try and productively add to someone’s learning.

I guess I just misunderstood what you were arguing then. For posterity: I believe datasets containing children is fine, datasets containing csam is not, and the legality of generating csam should be left up to psychologists on whether or not it is a societal net benefit. Whichever way is better for children that exist is my vote.

I’m not arguing whether or not it should be legal, I was just offering my first hand experience in regards to the capabilities of these local models since people seem to be confused as to how this actually works.

That would be true, it’d be pretty difficult to build a model without any pictures of children at all, and then try and describe to the model how to alter an adult to make a child. Is anyone asking for that though? To make it illegal to have regular pictures of children in these datasets?

I’m not going to say that csam in training sets isn’t a problem. However, even if you remove it, the model remains largely the same, and its capabilities remain functionally identical.

You should consider reversing the roles. There’s no reason your homelab cannot be the client, and have your vps be the server. Once the wireguard virtual network exists, network traffic doesn’t really care which was the client and which was the server. Saves you from opening a port to attackers on your home network.

It doesn’t need csam data for training, it just needs to know what a boob looks like, and what a child looks like. I run some sdxl-based models at home and I’ve observed it can be difficult to avoid more often than you’d think. There are keywords in porn that blend the lines across datasets (“teen”, “petite”, “young”, “small” etc). The word “girl” in particular I’ve found that if you add that to basically any porn prompt gives you a small chance of inadvertently creating the undesirable. You have to be really careful and use words like “woman”, “adult”, etc instead to convince your image model not to make things that look like children. If you’ve ever wondered why internet-based porn generators are on super heavy guardrails, this is why.

With my country’s propensity for cultural appropriation, I would like also appropriate this practice of executing white-collar crime bosses.

Sorry I should have said “carbons and carbons related qol extensions”

Did you ever get carbons working properly? (As in, mobile and desktop clients of the same user both getting messages and marking as read remotely between them)

It has always struck me as odd that people surprisedpikachuface.jpg whenever something inherently highly sexual is… checks notes sexualized by spectators.

I’m with you. Either educate, own it, and lean into it, or get rid of it.