David From Space

There are a couple ‘Other - Please Specify’ fields I definitely filled out with ‘Do not do AI’.

Supply chains are literally chains of suppliers, e.g. vendors. Your ‘simplest electronic product’ could absolutely be constrained by whom you choose to work with.

If your vendor locks you into buying from a certain source, and their vendor requires the same, and so on up the chain, how would you describe that dynamic to differentiate from a single vendor being the point of restriction?

To your point that the phrase didn’t exist, here are three supply-chain oriented papers that directly reference the phrase: This paper is exploring the social dynamics of buyers and sellers:

Lock-in situations in supply chains: A social exchange theoretic study of sourcing arrangements

Specifically, we believe that the examination of lock-in situations between a manufacturer and its supplier, i.e., instances where for all intent and purposes, one party is heavily dependent upon the other party, with few alternatives, under social exchange theory, can provide new insights into controlled self-interest behaviors (e.g., strategies) in on-going supply chain relationships.

This paper is about supply chains in plastic management, but the phrase is here:

Business models and sustainable plastic management: A systematic review of the literature

Barriers frequently mentioned were high costs, complexity of new systems, supply chain lock-in and low customer buy-in.

And here’s a paper about optimizing your supply chain where it is referenced as something to avoid:

Orchestrating cradle-to-cradle innovation across the value chain

This one even has a handy definition:

Supply chain lock-in:

Contracts and strong dependencies with suppliers not supporting circularity (e.g., either due to non-willingness or lock-in in production facilities optimized for linear concepts). 

I suppose if you would like to be super extra pendantic Wikipedia does have you covered with “Collective Monopolistic Vendor Lock-in”.

Try another search engine: https://xo.wtf/search?q=what+is+supply-chain+lock-in

Can you share what the final desired goal is? It sounds like your goal is actually to provide your services to Bob securely over the internet, is that a fair description? You mentioned eventually grabbing a domain, how do you feel about publicly exposed services with authentication? For instance, I use authentik in front of Jellyfin and paperless myself for a little extra authentication juice.

It sucks, but as someone who hosts their own services and supports business clients: If they have a budget, Office365 all the way. Does it suck paying money to M$? Oh hell yeah. But it’s a ‘cost of doing business’. Don’t screw around if they can afford it, just go O365 :(

try pfizer/poppy-lrud-normal-128, run it straight offff your neural chip and feed it 1 GB RAM you’ll be gud2go

https://www.theregister.com/2024/07/31/digicert_certificates_extension/

Don’t worry, the authorities already have the slightly less convenient way to backdoor things. Why make a fake release when you can just include it in the real release for the price of just a little coercion?

You may be interested in https://github.com/blastbeng/subtify Disclaimer: I’ve never tried it, just saw it recently on The Forbidden Site

I think that’s the way to go. A bunch of northern countries have already started working on 2 and 3 - in that more natural, more restricted lighting is available in the city. Especially during the winter, it can suck when daylight lasts only 10 hours or less.

And the dark is just dangerous, even in modern times. For better or worse some primal part of me ‘knows’ that civilization means keeping the lights on and I think most people would agree. We can just be way more responsible and less impactful to nature with it.

Looks really cool. I’ve been working on implementing SSO through Authentik for every home lab service that supports it (Like Proxmox!) Do you think you’ll add SSO/SAML? If you do, I recommend not locking it behind the enterprise plan to encourage adoption.