Completely disagree, for many people it was the only track in iTunes. And when things triggered iTunes to play it played that.
I was in an older man’s car last year. It started playing the album. He remarked “oh that always plays, I don’t know why” as I reached for the volume.
A decade later that album is still annoying people. Bluetooth triggered play or something like that and the only music on the old iPhone started playing.
I’ve met so many people who only have that one album on their devices, and it plays every time they plug into their car or connect via Bluetooth. And they are all just annoyed/accepting of it. My wife was one of them. And what made it worse was you couldn’t just pause it: with her car’s particular head unit, anything you touched (like the volume control) would cause the head unit to issue another “play music” command to restart it. Eventually enough was enough and I figured out how to remove the album for good.
If I'm reading all this correctly, it sounds like Apple has a system that will automatically play unintended music at various times from the music library. The only way to prevent this is to completely wipe out the entire library.
And the chief complaint is that there is an album in the library.
> If I'm reading all this correctly, it sounds like Apple has a system that will automatically play unintended music at various times from the music library.
No, in this case the play command was coming from the attached device. Apple’s product was complying with the command in the only way it could, by playing the songs in the library.
Of course it's not the only way to comply. The more sensible default is to continue playing whatever's in your queue. So if you had nothing there, noting would play.
That’s right. Various connected devices are over-eager to assume the user wants to play media, and command the phone into do so unexpectedly. This is fine if there is no media to play, but then all of a sudden, thanks to Apple’s decision, there was unwanted media to play, and this album would be the one always playing.
So the album didn’t cause the problem but it revealed it.
Because the presence of that album is what creates this bug and the user never purchased or downloaded it themself.
I have this same problem but it plays my wedding playlist from nearly 20 years ago. Some terribly annoying song I no longer like. I assume it’s too much work to delete my library and so I just deal with the annoyance.
If it annoyed them that much they’d have rung apple support and gotten it removed. I agree it’s bad and they shouldn’t have done it, but after a decade you have to accept some personal responsibility for it, if I bought a shoe and a rock was inside from factory and my foot hurt for 10 years at some point some of your current suffering is your own fault for not removing it lol
My partners young niece dislikes U2 and apple for that move. She said a lot of her friend are the same. It was a bad move. They should have just made the album free and not pushed it to every device.
Apple did give away free videos on the old Mac OS install cds like widows did. I think to show off quick time and that your computer can play videos (back when that was newish). They didn’t install onto you hard drive..
He remarked “oh that always plays, I don’t know why” as I reached for the volume.
I use Spotify in the car, and have for years. A couple of weeks ago I made the mistake of saying, "Hey, Siri, play liked songs."
"OK, playing Apple Music."
Oh, well, yet another spark of genius from the tire fire that is Siri. Whatever. I switched back to Spotify manually and went on with my day.
Since then, every time I get in the car it starts playing tracks on Apple Music. No matter how many times I relaunch Spotify, even after force-closing the Apple Music app on the phone itself, Apple Music keeps coming back.
If there is a way to get it to properly resume the playback state at shutdown time, I'm not smart enough to find it. 100% pure unadulterated enshittification... courtesy of Apple, the company with "taste."
It could work either way. It would be better to phrase it as "outside of turbo mode it operated as a 4mhz 8086, with turbo it operated faster (usually the CPU's actual rated speed)".
There is no OPNSense script I think historically in part because any misconfig could expose the Promox instance to the world. It is easy enough for advanced users to spin up a VM with the ISO. There has been a request for a OPNSense script made recently.
I agree with OMV. It certainly can be used as is, but not usually how people want to use it. A note was added to the script a few days ago.
> I don't see any glue scripts to get VMs talking to each other
There is a Tailscale script which technically helps them talk to each other (over Tailscale) :)
The scripts are designed to setup self contained LCX containers. We are trying to avoid building our own k8s.
Great, now I am down the tailscale rabbit hole and just have to use it!
I think I will stick to using proxmox virtual ports to create my network so I can more easily only stick to individual device registration in tailscale and save on that overhead when I'm home, but then also add tailscale /headscale into the mix somewhere so I can tap in via VPN when I am out of the house.
Tailscale and OPNsense are more difficult to get working together due to conflicting project goals (one blocks well, the other opens up well), but it looks like it's worth it to me.
Any reason you didn't go NixOS in a Proxmox VM? The advantage would not be having to do a full reinstall if anything went wrong and being able to spin up other OS' if needed. The downside would be a few percentage of performance loss.
NixOS takes a snapshot on every rebuild, which happens pretty much every time you install something or change a configuration setting, meaning that if I screw something up, generally all I have to do is reboot and choose the previous generation.
Of course I could install NixOS inside Proxmox, but part of the appeal of NixOS is that everything in the system is managed by the configuration.
It is also worth mentioning that Proxmox uses ZFS making snapshotting quick and Proxmox also has a very good backup system.
If you want to treat your self-hosted applications as "sheep" (1) , then terraform k8s etc. is a better bet.
But if you are happy to manually restore from a backup or snapshot when something goes wrong, or automatically have your LXC container shifted to different hardware if you have a cluster, then Proxmox is for you. The reality is that in a home setup you will spend about as much or less time maintaining your "pets" than than you would your "farm".
"It is also worth mentioning that Proxmox uses ZFS"
No it does not enforce ZFS or any other filesystem. That's up to you. ZFS or BTRFS are fine when indicated - and you need to know your stuff.
Cephs for clustering (hyperconverged) is very much a first class citizen. I generally only use EXT4 as a filesystem - keep it simple. XFS is lovely too, especially for reflinks if you need them.
(1) Wal and Cooch know how to run a farm (and so do I, in the UK!)
> No it does not enforce ZFS or any other filesystem. That's up to you. ZFS or BTRFS are fine when indicated - and you need to know your stuff.
You are correct, it is optional and I should have made that clear. While optional it does have native support for ZFS and takes advantage of ZFS features, like instant snapshotting of LCX containers.
Along with the submitter, I am also on the team of maintainers who volunteered to help with maintenance of this project after tteck's sad news that they were entering hospice (1). The team members are all motivated individuals, who are enthusiastic on carrying on tteck's legacy.
We are moving forward in a transparent manner and I am more than happy to answer any questions.
Incredibly sad. It’s a real testament to tteck that he took the time to transition the project, and make his wishes known how he wanted us to proceed. Tteck is a legend.
The major advantage over pumped hydro would be you do not need very specific geography to make it happen (90 - 300+m change in elevation)