The control of card processors over what we’re allowed to see and buy is absolute bullshit. And this is coming from someone who spent $0 on porn in my life.

This is why we need digital cash systems outside the control of those companies. I’m not specifically talking about cryptocurrency. Even a central bank digital currency is better than this. Benjamin Franklin in your wallet doesn’t care what you spend him on. Neither should your digital money.

I think it is generally okay to bundle the root domain certificate and the wildcard for its subdomains into a single renewal.

So for example:

example.com
*.example.com

The data is all stored server-side. The worst that could happen is the sync connection stops working and you need to redownload the files. Nothing gets deleted by these commands. They will still be on your disk and accessible by you.

If this breaks Nextcloud, it indicates something’s wrong with your installation.

I’m guessing you’re talking about the client, right? The data folder on the server shouldn’t be touched or modified, except by Nextcloud.

Check who owns the folder. I’ll assume the folder is at ~/Nextcloud, but if it’s not, just substitute in the path to the Nextcloud folder.

You can check who owns the folder using ls:

ls -la ~/Nextcloud

This should give you something like:

drwx------ 10 user group    4096 2024-03-04 00:00 Nextcloud

Where the word “user” is in the above example should be the name of the owner of the directory. Where the word “group” is should be the group.

If either is root, check to make sure the Nextcloud client is not running as root (using sudo or otherwise).

Otherwise, give yourself ownership of the directory:

sudo chown username:username -R ~/Nextcloud

Replace username with your username.

Mine is… eh. It’s alright. I don’t use any of the apps. Just the actual sync functionality. Sometimes when I’m moving files around there’s a problem where the entire thing just stops responding. My MediaWiki instance still works, just not Nextcloud. Not sure why this happens and not sure if it also happens to other people.

For comparison, it is running on a Contabo VPS M

If you want to call it that, you can. The State spying by proxy (paying or asking companies for info) is legal and not prohibited by Amendment 4. Amendment 4 does not protect the subjects of information. It protects the controllers of information (which would be the car company).

This is getting off-track again—

Government agencies paying private companies for your information, or even just asking for it in exchange for something or nothing is legal. That’s because nothing was searched unreasonably (because consent was given by the controller of the information) nor was anything seized against the controller’s will.

You are not in the picture. The information might be about you but you don’t control the information, the car company does. From a legal standpoint, you are irrelevant for the purposes of Amendment 4 protection.

Amendment 4 protects the controller of the information from Government seizure but does not protect the subject of that information. Privacy laws are what are intended to protect the subjects of information. There is some overlap of course. For example, your computer has lots of information about you and what you did in the past. You would be both the subject of the information and the controller (since it’s stored on your computer).

Please remember, I am describing what the law is, not what it should be.

Correct and it is not illegal. It is an invasion of privacy but the law doesn’t prohibit that. Amendment 4 covers the Government doing it without the permission of the person who controls the information. It refers to “can the Government bust in or sneak in to get info”, not “can the Government make clandestine deals to buy info for surveillance purposes”.

Do you actually literally believe that (in the context of law), or is that just rhetorical speech?

Amendment 4 does not apply to the practices of a private company. That’s what privacy legislation is intended to protect against. Amendment 4 only applies to spying done by the State.

You’re getting a bit off-track here. The scenario is this: the company that provides the software for your care collects data. This part is unconcerned with Amendment 4. Amendment 4 prohibits the State from collecting information and searching unreasonably. It does not prohibit the private company that provides the software from doing so. That is what privacy laws are intended to protect against, not Amendment 4.

Amendment 4 also does not prevent the company that collected that data from providing it to the police upon request. Amendment 4 (and the rest of the US Constitution) applies only to the State. Private companies and private individuals are not bound by it.

Disappointing result but this seems like something for the legislature to fix. Courts aren’t always the solution, sometimes you have to just fix the damn law.