When did Wondermark get color? Horrible modern stuff.

Nah, you were trying to shit on something and point out flaws with a hypothetical product wihout even bothering to read about it. You got called out on talking shite - don’t take the hump.

A moon pool or a regular one?

Just a regular one, but I imagine they’ll add one if you ask for it.

That just means you’re commenting on something without knowing anything about it, and so far everything you’ve commented has been incorrect?

It comes with two boats, jetskis, a helipad, and the ability to surface. You’re not trapped in a hotel with no windows. It’s not pitch black. You have ways to leave. It would have taken less time to learn this by reading the article than it would have taken to type this bollocks.

Not pitch black until > 800m.

Not so. You should really look at the info before commenting lol.

“It’s got no windows!” - there are windows pretty clearly visible in the renders.

“There’s no light down there!” - it tops out at 250m, light reaches about 800m.

It has windows.

Clarification: the bogus AI images they’ve got have windows in the viewing gallery. It’s all bullshit though - it features the images from SAFE that are allso bullshit but keep popping up in various articles, notably* the MRI room.

https://www.migaloo-submarines.com/m5/

• Length overall: 165.8 m
• Beam: 23.0 m
• Draft: 8.6 m
• Range: approx. 15.000 km
• Submerged duration: approx. 4 weeks
• Depth: approx. 250 m

It even has a pool inside it!

Pffft, if you can write in Scots then basic English punctuation is a no-brainer.

“I have to get over this some time, why not now?”

~ Louis Wu, from Ringworld, written by Larry Niven.

“Because I’m not ready” is also a valid answer, but it gets your brain moving towards the goal I find.

Yikes, how Draconian. Id be fucking pissed if someone came in and forcibly open sourced a product I had invested millions in developing.

That’s overly complicated for some of the users - most of them aren’t very tech savvy, and they’re watching via all kinds of devices - TV’s, iOS, Kindle, etc.

I don’t see any major security reason for access requiring a VPN. Are there particular vulnerabilities that you’re concerned about, or just those that generally come from having a web-facing service?

A VPN would not be practical for my situation, as the instance is used by various family members and friends. I’m happy for them to use my JF instance but I’m not providing VPN services as well.

If you’re not referring to any specific vulnerabilities in JF then I feel confident there are no exceptional risks from allowing web access to JF? Just the usual ones?

Does jellyfin have known vulnerabilities for bots to exploit? It’s been up for several years with, afaik, no problems.

System has usual steps taken to harden it, JF is behind an apache proxy, letsencrypt handles ssl certs, fail2ban is running, and users are required to have strong passwords with no option to reset or self-register.

What’s the issue? I’ve run mine exposed for several years…

They’re not a joke, they’re a product called Seawing, made by a French company. They’re being being actively tested and can be retro fitted to existing vessels rather than requiring a new design.

That would be amazingly impractical. May as well say “what if all website were forced to be .txt files”.

Most website template frameworks (Bootstrap/Foundation) etc rely on Javascript for basic UI features. Imagine having to wait for the server to toggle a simple CSS class on your page any time the user wants to view a menu, togle a button, or view a popup/modal/lightbox/whatever.

Well that was disappointing. Not a single explosion?

Explain?

Apparently, you don’t.