[–] 7 points 12 hours ago*

"Mich erstaunt, wie viele angeblich wissen, wer die Vermummten waren"

Wen das in unserer wundervollen post-faktischen Welt, in der es einzig und allein noch um Narrative geht, auch nur im geringsten überrascht, hat das letzte Jahrzehnt verschlafen oder ist einfach völlig resistent gegen jegliche Gehirnaktivität.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 12 hours ago*

    Sure, mate...

    Letting Germany have the by far biggest army in all of Western Europe for decades as long as the cold war was ongoing: totally fine.

    Screaming about Germany needing to demilitarize the moment the soviet union broke down and you don't need them to defend you anymore: totally sane.

    Complaining about Germany not doing enough for their army after forcing them to massively size it down the moment there is a possible threat on the horizon: sure, why not?

    Also –just one second after complaining about not enough German military spending–: haha, Germany nazis! Applaud my genius!

    If you don't want to look like a total nutjob, at least be consistent...

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 8 points 14 hours ago*

    No.

    Every population will advocate for finding another platform. The governments however are bribed bought lobbied to act against their countries interest, so they won't. Which weakens confidence in democracy even more.

    So showing off their insanity while still getting away with it is in fact a double-win for such fascist-adoring oligarchs. For the same reason all those deeply corrupt right-wingers have no problem openly showing their corruption now. It has long become part of their "democracy doesn't work"-messaging.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 4 points 14 hours ago

    Rechte Lügner, die rechte Lügen kreischen, um für Macht die Demokratie zu schädigen, sind also ein globalen Phänomen, weil der ganze Abschaum überall nach dem exakt selben Spielbuch operiert... Wer hätte das bloß gedacht?

    Ich fang mal an: 🤚*meld*

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (3 children)

    Germany bought a small number (35) US fighter jets as replacement for the aging Panavia Tornado used as bombers carrying US nuclear weapons as they are not allowed by their allies to have their own.

    And they did so alongside ordering more Eurofighters (58 additional ones already ordered, more planned long-term) for all other roles (even ones where EF variants are still to be developed - EW for example which also is covered by Tornados at the moment) exactly for one reason: the alternative would be giving the US all details of the Eurofighter to get them certified for these bombs.

    Context matters... and allies (France and UK in particular) are free to find another arangement than forcing Germany to use US equipment to fullfil NATO requirements. Alas... they won't because... reasons...

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 10 points 1 day ago

    But nobody is replacing coal and gas with nuclear because it's total economic insanity. What they do instead is talking about replacing it with nuclear soon™, so they can ignore renewables and burn some more of those tasty fossil fuels.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 10 points 1 day ago*

    'Leaving France' is probably just as effective as those DNS blocks in general... so not at all.

    "Dear user... You can reach our DNS server under 9.9.9.9., also via https://dns.quad9.net/dns-query, tls://dns.quad9.net or quic://dns.quad9.net for encrypted communication because nobody needs to know which addresses you look up.
    PS: If you are currently residing in France, pretend you did not ready any of this..."

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 day ago

    Hat die Regierung schon Verbotszonen für das offene Mitführen von vollautomatischen Waffen in Autos angekündigt, oder sind unsere Nachbarn weniger wahnhaft, als es bei uns der Fall ist?

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago* (1 child)

    Does it? This looks more like a big field were I can fill in the commands to do that all by myself.

    in hopes that the file on the server did not get modified in the meantime

    Yeah... locking the file on the remote would be the absolute minimum for an actual sync tool.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago

    Sorry, aber so optimistisch bin ich nicht, dass ich davon ausgehe, sie seien sich ihres eigenen Tuns nicht völlig bewusst und müsten erst darauf aufmerksam gemacht werden, dass die Teil des Problems sind.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  •  

    As this will -thanks to me being quite clueless- be a very open question I will start with the setup:

    One nginx server on an old Raspi getting ports 80 and 443 routed from the access point and serving several pages as well as some reverse proxies for other sevices.

    So a (very simplified) nginx server-block that looks like this:

    # serve stuff internally (without a hostname) via http
    server {
    	listen 80 default_server;
    	http2 on;
    	server_name _; 
    	location / {
    		proxy_pass http://localhost:5555/;
                    \# that's where all actual stuff is located
    	}
    }
    # reroute http traffic with hostname to https
    server {
    	listen 80;
    	http2 on;
    	server_name server_a.bla;
    	location / {
    		return 301 https://$host$request_uri;
    	}
    }
    server {
    	listen 443 ssl default_server;
    	http2 on;
    	server_name server_a.bla;
       	ssl_certificate     A_fullchain.pem;
        	ssl_certificate_key A_privkey.pem;
    	location / {
    		proxy_pass http://localhost:5555/;
    	}
    }
    #actual content here...
    server {
    	listen 5555;
    	http2 on;
        	root /srv/http;
    	location / {
            	index index.html;
       	} 
        	location = /page1 {
    		return 301 page1.html;
    	}
        	location = /page2 {
    		return 301 page2.html;
    	}
            #reverse proxy for an example webdav server 
    	location /dav/ {
    		proxy_pass        http://localhost:6666/;
    	}
    }
    

    Which works well.

    And intuitively it looked like putting Anubis into the chain should be simple. Just point the proxy_pass (and the required headers) in the "port 443"-section to Anubis and set it to pass along to localhost:5555 again.

    Which really worked just as expected... but only for server_a.bla, server_a.bla/page1 or server_a.bla/page2.

    server_a.bla/dav just hangs and hangs, to then time out, seemingly trying to open server_a.bla:6666/dav.

    So long story short...

    How does proxy_pass actually work that the first setup works, yet the second breaks? How does a call for localhost:6666 (already behind earlier proxy passes in both cases) somehow end up querying the hostname instead?

    And what do I need to configure -or what information/header do I need to pass on- to keep the internal communication intact?

    view more: next ›