While I do have some control over my DNS and can create arbitrary TXT entries, I can’t to that in an automated way easily. I’m using Gandi.net to host my DNS rather than running my own DNS sever(s).

EDIT: Gandi is listed https://community.letsencrypt.org/t/dns-providers-who-easily-integrate-with-lets-encrypt-dns-validation/86438 so maybe I can automate a DNS-01 challenge without too much issue, I just have to switch away from certbot to one of the other tools.

It does have access to the HTTP root directories. But, it still can’t open port 80/443 when apache already has that port open.

EDIT: I guess my certbot renew just needs to be reconfigured to use a --webroot, so it doesn’t try to listen on it’s own.

Probably the comment has federated to lemmy.world, but the deletion of the comment hasn’t yet.

Looks like autoincorrect did a s/CRLs/Carla/ for you.

Technically my renews aren’t automated. I have a nightly cronjob that should renew certificates and restart services, but when the certificates need renewal, it always fails because it wants to open a port I’m already using in order to answer the challenge.

I hear there’s an apache module / configuration I can use, but I never got around to setting it up. So, when the cron job fails, I get an email and go run a script that stops apache, renews certs, and restarts services (including apache). I will be a bit annoying to have to do that more often, but maybe it’ll help motivate me to configure apache (or whatever) correctly.

Debian Stable

Enshittification will continue until morale improves.

The first one does tell you how to “completely remove Gemini from your smartphone” under that heading. I do not have the Gemini app installed.

The second one says:

Can you fully disable Gemini on Android?

No, and that’s by design. While you can turn off activity tracking, revoke permissions, and even uninstall the Gemini app on some devices, Google is actively replacing its Assistant app with Gemini.

But, I’ve also disabled Google Assistant across all applications, so I don’t share data with Gemini/Assistant. I had to lose some features to do so.

Overall, your reply serves to confirm for me that I have disabled Gemini on both of my Android devices. Still, I appreciate the links!

Honestly, it wouldn’t surprise me either way. There IS a lot of telemetry and other BS that is definitely still on my phone, included in OS updates, and not uninstallable (I can “uninstall updates”, but that would also give me back any security issues). But, I don’t think that it is Gemini, or at least predates that naming convention.

To get free of Google telemetry, I’d have to install a non-Google ROM, and I haven’t ever tried that.

Telemetry certainly can be abused, and Google should be legally (by regulation) required to provide a simple opt-out. BUT, telemetry really is a fairly normal thing to include in “web-scale” deployments and is primarily used to discover issues that have escaped into production without affecting a testing environment–or, at least, that what the telemetry systems I’ve interacted with as an software developer were for. So, I’m not too worried about non-personalized data collection.

EDIT: I confirmed that Google says I have no Gemini activity to delete, so while I’m sure my phone is reporting stuff, it’s not to Gemini.

Do you have some sort of evidence for this claim?

I’ve lost features that used to work without Gemini, but I believe it is disabled on both my Pixel 7 Pro and the Pixel 8 I have access to.

I disagree with the ruling because the bone in question was described as “long, thin”. If it was just bone chips, then it wouldn’t have caused the complainant issues. Because of that description I think the liability should (ultimately) be on the party the was responsible for deboning the chicken.

I could be wrong about how liability cases work, but I think the Ohio case should have held the restaurant liable for the complainant’s injury/distress but allow their findings to be carried into a suit from the restaurant against the supplier of the bag of boneless wings.

No deboning process is going to be perfect, but that’s what liability insurance is for. I do think no “long, thin” bones should make it through a reliable deboning process, tho.

I know you are getting downvoted, but I call the seat furthest from the aisle the “window” seat no matter what is on the “far” side of it.

So, I think it’s entirely possible that United wins this case in front of a judge. If it gets decided by a jury, I’d expect at least one person of the 12 (or so) to insist that “window seat” means there has to be a window.

I think you may have taken me too seriously, but if so that’s a very dismissive response. I think your reply would be improved by describing at least one (nigh-universal, so it applies to “things” in general) force and saying why it exists.

“down” is “just” a name for the direction everything falls.

Why do things fall? What happened to “a body at rest stays at rest”?

While that may contribute to the slipperiness of ice in certain circumstances, we know that ice is still slippery even when the compressive force is unable to melt the ice, even a thin layer. For example, we’ve studied ice at temperatures and pressures where liquid water doesn’t form.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20zyW0qoSTE

I don’t remember the details exactly, but in the (most common) crystalline arrangements of H20, at the surface/edge of ice the individual molecules don’t have all their crystalline “partners”, so they can still shift around to varying degrees, which makes ice slippery even when none of it can / does melt–all of the molecules are part of at least one crystal.

So we should ban every[thing that can] be used to harm oneself?

No. They should all be legal to acquire and self-administer.

Do you also think the FDA should stop having standards for food and drugs?

No. They enforce accuracy of labeling, which is important for people to make informed (consent) decisions about what they self-administer. They should stop making it illegal for a willing recipient to acquire an accurately labeled substance and self-administrate said substance.

They are materials that can be much more dangerously self-administered. Anything less dangerous can’t be justifiably banned restricted solely on the dangers of self-administration.

Bleach, ammonia, nicotine, and ethanol were the dangerous substances I mentioned earlier in the thread.

There is a difference between safety regulation and paternalism that I think you are failing to parse.

There is a fundamental right to bodily autonomy that you aren’t valuing.

You can call it whatever you want, if you prevent a person from self-administering any substance, you are violating their human rights.

On top of that, many, many OTC substances are much more lethal than HRT, so the risks of HRT cannot be great enough to justify them not being available OTC.

Data is not the plural of anecdote. As has been pointed out elsewhere in the thread, many countries have OTC HRT and do not have significantly higher morbidity or mortality rates associated with those materials. Your experiences, in the form you’ve shared them, are NOT citeable. So, we’re still at “Citation Needed” stage.

I think that uneducated or gullible people deserve full bodily autonomy, even if that means bad results from their choices.

Certainly, educated and sophisticated people can also get bad results from their choices; I see no reason to deny them to anyone else.