There were cluster bombs raining on the beach after russian AA shot down one of the rockets. But IIRC that beach was close to the military base, so it was pretty stupid to even go there.
Some people really want that Darwin award.
Plus there's russian propaganda with 100% successful AA and everything being under control with their 3 day special military operation.
Probably not what you're asking for, but I have an impression, that your primary motivation is curiosity and just good feeling of using the open platform, so I figured I'll mention it.
I'm using ESP32-C3 boards with some sensors and ESPHome to monitor air quality in my house. The board is RISC-V based and can be bought for real cheap. (single digit $ price generally) ESPHome is quite easy to work with and (If you're realistic with your expectations around very low power device) also quite powerful.
Honestly the ESPHome itself is almost too good if you're really curious as it abstracts the differences between various boards quite well. You're just editing a yaml file to define your desired functionality.
Even if you're hesitant to do some soldering, you can get pretty far if you buy board and sensors with pre-soldered pins and some jumper wires.
its only duty will be to spawn other, more restricted processes.
Perhaps I'm misremembering things, but I'm pretty sure the SysVinit didn't run any "more restricted processes". It ran a bunch of bash scripts as root. Said bash scripts were often absolutely terrible.
I don't agree with the premise of your comment about containers. I think most of the downsides you listed are misplaced.
First of all they make the user dumber. Instead of learning something new, you blindly "compose pull & up" your way. Easy, but it's dumbifier and that's not a good thing.
I'd argue, that actually using containers properly requires very solid Linux skills. If someone indeed blindly "compose pull & up" their stuff, this is no different than blind curl | sudo bash which is still very common. People are going to muddle through the installation copy pasting stuff no matter what. I don't see why containers and compose files would be any different than pipe to bash or random reddit comment with "step by step instructions". Look at any forum where end users aren't technically strong and you'll see the same (emulation forums, raspberry pi based stuff, home automation,..) - random shell scripts, rm -rf this ; chmod 777 that
Containers are just another piece of software that someone can and will run blindly. But I don't see why you'd single them out here.
Second, there is a dangerous trend where projects only release containers, and that's bad for freedom of choice
As a developer I can't agree here. The docker images (not "containers" to be precise) are not there replacing deb packages. They are there because it's easy to provide image. It's much harder to release a set of debs, rpms and whatnot for distribution the developer isn't even using. The other options wouldn't even be there in the first place, because there's only so many hours in a day and my open source work is not paying my bills most of the time. (patches and continued maintenance is of course welcome) So the alternative would be just the source code, which you still get. No one is limiting your options there. If anything the Dockerfile at least shows exactly how you can build the software yourself even without using docker. It's just bash script with extra isolation.
I am aware that you can download an image and extract the files inside, that's more an hack than a solution.
Yeah please don't do that. It's probably not a good idea. Just build the binary or whatever you're trying to use yourself. The binaries in image often depend on libraries inside said image which can be different from your system.
Third, with containers you are forced to use whatever deployment the devs have chosen for you. Maybe I don't want 10 postgres instances one for each service, or maybe I already have my nginx reverse proxy or so.
It might be easier (effort-wise) but you're certainly not forced. At the very least you can clone the repo and just edit the Dockerfile to your liking. With compose file it's the same story, just edit the thing. Or don't use it at all. I frequently use compose file just for reference/documentation and run software as a set of systemd units in Nix. You do you. You don't have to follow a path that someone paved if you don't like the destination. Remember that it's often someone's free time that paid for this path, they are not obliged to provide perfect solution for you. They are not taking anything away from you by providing solution that someone else can use.
I'm huge fan of Nix, but for someone wondering if they should "learn docker" Nix is absolutely brutal.
Also IMO while there's some overlap, one is not a complete replacement for the other. I use both in combination frequently.
That is what Musk said. Which is arguably pretty biased source. It was also said after the book was published, which makes me think Musk either didn't even read his own book and no one in his team did see a problem with what was in the book. Or he didn't even see it as a problem himself which wouldn't be his first catastrophic failure to read the room.
if you think it should not have been disabled there in the first place then that would mean Russia could use it for their own drone strikes aswell
Drone strikes on all the battleships Ukraine has? Or how exactly would they use it in waters where Ukraine only visits with drones and missiles?
Also I don't think it shouldn't have been disabled. I think it does not matter if it was disabled. The only difference it made was that Musk was in position to turn it on rather than to not turn it off. And he chose to help russian terrorists fucking up Ukraine big time as russia got its hands onto the undamaged drones.
If I had agreed to the request, then SpaceX would be explicitly complicit in a major act of war and conflict escalation
Sounds like what russian asset would say. Perhaps not because he's forced or bribed by russia, perhaps it just makes business sense.
In my view that is a perfectly valid reason
That's your opinion. I don't think it's valid reason to help terrorists. Those ships were later used in attempt to block food export risking famine in certain parts of the world and to lob missiles at Ukrainian cities. They were also used for that before. Perfectly valid reason to call Musk an russian asset IMO.
Musk did not enable it, because he thought, probably correctly, that would cause a major war.
This is what I'm referring to. It does not mention US sanctions.
Which is..?
probably correctly
It was neither correct nor probable. No one starts a war (whatever that means, the war has started already) over a fucking glorified accesspoint. It's just author pushing certain narrative. Not defending his own reputation.
/c/lost_russian_bots ?
I couldn't care less about Elon. I was just pointing out that trusting someone in one case while not trusting them in later isn't unreasonable. I was also pointing out that the "correction" was very obviously pushing certain narrative.
In my opinion not enabling the communication is equally as bad as disabling it on purpose. The end result was the same and in both cases it required decision to help russian terrorists.
As for whether Musk is an russian asset or not, I'd say he's cold blooded business man. Sometimes that makes him russian asset sometimes it does not.
Are you saying that you believe the claim he made in the book, but you refuse to believe him when he later comes out saying it was not accurate?
This would not be that surprising. They might have shared truth in the book, but seeing the (well deserved) shitstorm this generated they are trying to soften the blow.
The "correction" is very obviously pushing a narrative.
Musk did not enable it, because he thought, probably correctly, that would cause a major war.
"probably correctly" is doing some serous heavy lifting there seeing Ukraine drones sinking ship after ship with russia usually pretending it's light damage, smoking incident or bad weather.
I have a bunch of these myself and that is my experience, but don't have any screenshots now.
However there's great comparison of these thin clients if you don't mind Polish: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLRplLPdd3Q
Just the relevant screens to save you some time:
Power usage:
Cinebench multi core:
The power usage in idle is within 2W from Pi 4 and the performance is about double compared to overclocked Pi 4. It's really quite viable alternative unless you need really small device. The only alternative size-wise is slightly bigger WYSE 3040, but that one has x5-z8350 CPU, which sits somewhere between Pi3B+ and Pi4 performance-wise. It is also very low power though and if you don't need that much CPU it is also very viable replacement. (these can be easily bought for about €60 on eBay, or cheaper if you shop around)
Also each W of extra idle power is about 9kWh extra consumed. Even if you paid 50c/kWh (which would be more than I've ever seen) that's €5 per year extra. So I wouldn't lose my sleep over 2W more or less. Prices here are high, 9kWh/y is rounding error.
Most of the time when russia successfully (according to russian media) intercepts missile or drone, the falling debris hits the intended target. Perhaps it was surprising that working AA actually leads to different outcomes.