ubergeek77

This was the point of the protest. Reddit is all over search engine results, especially Google. If people can't get their answers from a random Reddit search result, the Reddit listings will eventually be deprioritized in favor of other, more reliable sources.

Forgejo is Gitea. It was a soft fork of Gitea, and more recently a hard fork.

You can read about why they hard forked, and decide for yourself if it's worth switching, but the consensus is that Forgejo is in better hands than Gitea.

Currently it's easy to migrate from Gitea to Forgejo, but the longer you wait and the more it diverges from Gitea, the harder it will become to migrate.

If you like the Forgejo direction and think it's in better hands than Gitea, you might want to consider migrating sooner rather than later. All of your data should remain intact as it's essentially a drop in replacement. This should only take you a few minutes if you're using the Docker version of Gitea.

Cloudflare Tunnels are black magic and exactly what you're looking for:

https://developers.cloudflare.com/cloudflare-one/connections/connect-networks/

Free, no need to self host a server somewhere externally. Can even be used for SSH!

I’m scratching my head to think what Vultr could do better in this case

There was substantial room for improvement in the way they spoke publicly about this issue. See my comment above.

I still don't like how flippant they've been in every public communication. I read the ToS. It's short for a ToS, everyone should read it. They claim it was taken "out of context," but there wasn't much context to take it out of. The ToS didn't make this distinction they're claiming, there was no separation of Vultr forum data from cloud service data. It was just a bad, poorly written ToS, plain and simple.

They haven't taken an ounce of responsibility for that, and have instead placed the blame on "a Reddit post" (when this was being discussed in way more detail on other tech forums, Vultr even chimed in on LowEndTalk).

As for this:

Section 12.1(a) of our ToS, which was added in 2021, ends with "for purposes of providing the Services to you." This is intended to make it clear that any rights referenced are solely for the purposes of providing the Services to you.

This means nothing. A simple "we are enhancing your user experience by mining your data and giving you a better quality service" would have covered them on this.

We only got an explanation behind the ToS ransom dialog after their CMO whined in a CRN article. That information should have been right in the dialog on the website.

In both places, they've actively done vague things to cause confusion, and are offended when people interpret it incorrectly.

They also don't magically make lawyers free. No lawyer is going to bother with an EULA squabble pro bono.

That's true, they do have a Linux search filter on GOG.com.

Which is why it's even weirder to me that they still don't make GoG Galaxy available on Linux. It stinks, even for Windows games on Wine/Proton, because you can't access cloud saves or online services without GoG Galaxy running.

I've managed to make it work with a hacky script to launch Galaxy under Wine, but it's fragile, crashes sometimes, and I really just want something better.

They will do literally anything except support the Steam Deck

There was no judgement, only a settlement. Yuzu is not "illegal." Nintendo can abuse DMCA and request GitHub take these down, and GitHub will probably listen, but Nintendo would not be "legally in the right" to do so.

I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about this:

I agree with the sentiment here, but all the technologies mentioned allowed us to ship a working application in a timely manner. I think that should always be the first goal. Now that this is out of the way, we can start looking at improving efficiency, security, resilience etc.

"Security Second" is not good messaging for a project like this.

But I'm glad my comment was hilarious to you.

I don't need or want replication of my private projects to a peer to peer network. That's just extra bandwidth to and from my server, and bandwidth can be expensive. I already replicate my code to two different places I control, and that's enough for me.

I'm not sure who Radicle is for, but I don't think the casual hobbyist looking to self host something like Forgejo would benefit at all from Radicle.

Loading the source code for Radicle on Radicle also seems fairly slow. It seems this distributed nature comes at a speed tradeoff.

With the whole Yuzu thing going on, I can see some benefit to Radicle for high profile projects that may be subject to a takedown. In that respect, it's a bit like "Tor for Git."

I suspect that over time, pirate projects and other blatantly illegal activities will make use of Radicle for anti-takedown reasons. But to me, these two projects solve two different problems, for two different audiences, and are not really comparable.

Edit: There is already enough controversy surrounding Radicle, that, if I were someone looking to host a takedown-resistant, anonymous code repository, I would probably be better served hosting an anonymous Forgejo instance on a set of anonymous Njalla domains and VPSes. The blockchain aspect was already a bit odd, and what I'm now seeing from Radicle does not exactly inspire confidence. I don't think I'll ever use this.

It was just how the settlement was worded; this team is prevented from distributing "anything that circumvent's Nintendo's blah blah," and Citra was developed by the same team. So, it got taken down all the same :(