dd?

Forums are an invaluable source of information for countless purposes. Even extremely old forum posts can be a life-saver.

Some services run where they are natively accessible through tor, but most don’t.

This was mostly what I was referring to. Does there already exist a sort of “hidden fediverse”? As in a fediverse that is only accessible over Tor/i2p?

I wasn’t clear enough in my original post. I was referring to the idea of creating a sort of “hidden fediverse” which would be separate from the one over the clearnet.

I wasn’t clear enough in my original post. I was mostly referring to the idea of creating a sort of “Hidden Fediverse” which would be separate from the regular clearnet fediverse.

You can connect to most instances over Tor

I was not enough in my original post. I was generally referring to your second point about hosting a sort of “Hidden Fediverse”.

Flatpak – It’s not without it’s own issues, of course, but it does the job. I’m not fan of how snaps are designed, and I don’t think canonical is trustworthy enough to run a packaging format. Appimages are really just not good for widespread adoption. They do what they are designed to do well, but I don’t think it’s wide to use them as a main package format.

I’ve heard that ReFS is supposedly replacing NTFS, on Windows.

Y’all don’t update your services?

It would put the more popular instances under enormous stress, if they had to serve every single subscriber from any other instance.

From what I understand, media (images, videos, etc.) is not cached. Does that not mean that, in the worst case where every post contained an image, the instance would be serving every subscriber, anyways?

I don’t really understand this reasoning. Some server would still need to receive those requests at some point. Would it not be better if those requests were distributed, rather than pounded onto one server? If you have a server caching all the content for its users, then all of its users are sending all of those requests for content to that one single server. If users fetched content from their source servers, then the load would be distributed. The only real difference that I can think of is that the speed of post retreival. Even then, though, that could be flawed, as perhaps the source server is faster than one’s host server.

For your reference, please see the updated post. I ran a S.M.A.R.T test, and the drive is indeed borked.

Thank you very much for all of the extra information!

I ran a S.M.A.R.T short test, and, yeah, the hard drive is quickly dying:

=== START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION ===
SMART overall-health self-assessment test result: FAILED!
Drive failure expected in less than 24 hours. SAVE ALL DATA.
Failed Attributes:
ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME          FLAG     VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE      UPDATED  WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE
  1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate     0x002f   001   001   051    Pre-fail  Always   FAILING_NOW 1473

Please correct me if I am wrong, but this feels like a flaw with how Lemmy (perhaps other fediverse apps as well, I’m not sure) is designed. Why do I need to store all posts made to a community that one of the users on my instance subscribes to? Would it not be better to simply store my user’s posts, and comments, and the posts made to any communities hosted on my instance? Why do I need to store information from other instances, and users?

it is storage that requires more attention

Please correct me if I am wrong, but this feels like a flaw with how Lemmy (perhaps other fediverse apps as well, I’m not sure) is designed. Why do I need to store all posts made to a community that one of the users on my instance subscribes to? Would it not be better to simply store my user’s posts, and comments, and the posts made to any communities hosted on my instance? Why do I need to store information from other instances, and users?

That disk certainly isn’t healthy.

For my own future knowledge, what, exactly, in the logs, led you to that conclusion?

image the whole thing with ddrescue

Since you mention “image”, I’m assuming that I would need a drive at least equal to the size of the source drive to store the image? The issue is that the source drive is 2TB in size, so I would need to source another 2TB drive (at least) to store the image.

Unfortunately, I am unable to downgrade to LTS. I need the latest kernel version for a my WiFi card (I’ve had a ton of annoying driver issues with this specific card that seem to now be fixed in the latest few kernel updates).

Nothing logged.

I have the exact same issue. I’ve never been able to see any errors in the logs. Essentially just says “going to sleep” then that’s it.

Using Nvidia with closed source drivers by chance?

No, I have an AMD GPU.

some hardware specs might help others with assisting you.

Noted! I’ll update the post.

Ah, dang, yeah that would do it. Thank you!

It appears I have misread the stack exchange posts I was looking at. I thought I read that they said that chown, by default, traverses the symbolic link, but, in actuality, what they were saying was that it, by default, changes the ownership of the target file of the symbolic link.