All good, I feel like we’re in total agreement here.
They’ve done something stupid.
Now we all get to see how far they’ll take it.

The Australian government isn’t scared to piss off Big Tech when it suits them.

The ASSISTANCE AND ACCESS ACT 2018 lead to some people I know being given the option of quitting or relocating to somewhere that the Australian government couldn’t do THAT.

It’s certainly an extra factor when deciding to offshore development teams here.

As a “great” man once said:

“The laws of mathematics are very commendable, but the only law that applies in Australia is the law of Australia,”

I understand that I’m making a slippery slope argument, a fallacy in itself.

I just don’t trust that the purpose of this legislation is what it says on the tin because it’ll never achieve it’s stated aim, it’ll just teach a whole generation how to break the law.

And having failed, will the government stop?
No, they’ll try to ban VPNs, or something else equally vacuous.

edit to add: This reminds me a bit of the tobacco excise.
On paper, it’s to discourage people from smoking as it becomes increasingly unaffordable to do so.
But what’s actually happened is that a whole black market has sprung up, making cigarettes even cheaper than before, funding criminal organisations, who have ZERO incentive to not sell to anyone who will buy them (including children).

Beyond the above, I feel there’s an inherent value to anonymous conversation that will be lost.
Sure, anonymous conversation allows echo chambers where cookers come up with nonsense - but every societal upheaval in the past would have started with unsanctioned conversations happening behind closed doors.
Woman’s suffrage?
Same sex marriage?
Person-hood/voting rights for indigenous Australians?

It’s easy to see them as obvious now, but once they were illegal.
Those changes occurred in public referendums that started with private conversations.

These are pretty calm messages to an Australian and Garry is British, so culture checks out.

// What the fuck
// Fuck dynamic compiling.
// what the fuck is this shit
// What the fuck, why isnt this a method

Should this by the by commentary be there?
Not really.
But as a programmer, I understand each and every time I see something like:

// Urgh this is so dirty, Invalidate() and Refresh() do nothing.
tButt.AutoSize = false;
tButt.Width = maxWidth;
tButt.Height = maxHeight;
tButt.AutoSize = true;

As you can see, I too have made a “least bad” choice for pragmatic reasons.

I take no pride in correcting you.

Actually, if you hit those 3 dots on the top right and select “All Permissions”, you’ll see there’s a whole host of things it demands that you can’t opt out of.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_law_of_headlines

“Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no.”

But I want to be wrong.

When you’re personally confident that you won’t be rolling back.
I tend to keep the previous backup as each version is successfully updated.

ie I was running 10.10.7, I still had 10.10.6 sitting there, but I deleted it after successfully upgrading to 10.11.0.

Several people have experienced this error: https://github.com/jellyfin/jellyfin/issues/15058

It appears to be when the config of jellyfin lists the cache and the transcode in the same path (or if the transcode directory is within the cache directory).
My understanding is that as the image starts, it writes these hidden dot files (.jellyfin-cache and .jellyfin-transcode) and checks for their existence before it will continue with the next load step.
Hence why they keep coming back when you delete them.
Complicating this is that if you are running jellyfin inside docker, the external mounts can confuse the internal mounts.
(ie INSIDE the docker image you have them in /cache and /transcode, but OUTSIDE you have transcode and cache both mounted in /home/untouchedwagons/jellyfinstuff/)

Within your running instance of 10.11.0, make sure the configuration for cache and transcode are in complete different directories (ie /cache and /config/transcoding-temp/), then shutdown the server (to save that configuration change).

If that’s not clear, a little more info will be useful for diagnosing this.

If you can log into the site, it’s done.
If you try to access the site and you get a “startup log” page, it’s still ongoing (and it will show you there what it’s doing).
https://jellyfin.org/posts/jellyfin-release-10.11.0/#startup-ui-and-log-viewer

They are removing the hard to use old version that was inherited from the original Emby code.
For years now, the developers have been advocating the use of a reverse proxy to provide TLS.

Yes, the update should only affect the Jellyfin specific things (databases, configs, metadata). Your media itself is only deleted/modified under very limited and specific circumstances, and you can (and many people do) choose to mount the media read only.

I think the feel from the Devs is that there isn’t enough new functionality to justify the major version bump, this primarily being a reimplementation of existing features.

BUT, I agree with you, it should definitely be V11 under the semantic versioning scheme.
Whilst there is a migration path here, the database changes under the hood alone are likely to break backwards compatibility with all plugins (with in-house plugins being upgraded in sync).
Such breakage is kind of the defining characteristic of a MAJOR version.

Backup of the jellyfin cache, Configs and database.
Your media should be outside of all that.

Exactly where those things are depends on your exact install method (native/docker/Linux/windows).

https://jellyfin.org/docs/general/administration/backup-and-restore/

Category C (semi auto .22LR + miss-categorised shotguns) is for farmers.
Category D (centre-fire semi auto + miss-categorised shotguns) is for specialist pest controllers.

Professional hunters tend to use Category B (manually cycled bolt/lever/pump centre-fire).

You’re not wrong, I just wanted to add more info.

There’d be like a thousand people that qualify in the entire country for a real Category D.

nationalsecurityjournal.org looks like a propaganda outlet.

How do you even check the bonafides of a random site like this?

Amongst my group of friends, no one denied that INXS deserved to be in the list, everyone hated that they won and no one could agree on what should have got #1.

It should go without saying that this was done by loving carers who had the best interests of the animal in question at heart, not coloured by anything crass such as financial considerations - yet here I am.

There are lions at Monarto, a short trip up the freeway and I’ve heard the question of why she wasn’t taken there?
Because the pride would probably have killed her.

She was old, she would have refused to eat, then she’d become weak, then she’d get sick and then she’d have suffered until she died.
The keepers made a call, and as much as people might call this callous, others would have called them out if Amani was allowed to suffer for the following 3 months.

If you “vibe code” your way through trial and error to an app, it may work.
But if you don’t understand what it’s doing, why it’s doing it and how it’s doing it?
Then you can’t (easily) maintain it.
If you can’t fix bugs or add features, you don’t have a saleable product - you have a proof of concept.

AI tools are useful, but letting the tool do all the driving is asking for the metaphorical car to crash.