Headscale is only really useful if you need to manage multiple users and/or networks. If you only have one network you want to have access to and a small number of users/devices it only increases the attack surface over having one wireguard listening because it has more moving parts.
I set it up to open the port for few secs via port knocking. Plus another script that runs on the server that opens connections to my home ip addr doing reverse lookup to a domain my router updates via dyndns so devices at my home don’t need to port knock to connect.
I think the most important thing about Tailscale is how accessible it is. Is there a GUI for Wireguard that lets me configure my whole private network as easily as Tailscale does?
I myself would be more inclined to move if I had an option to run Adobe suite, Excel, TouchDesigner, Ableton and Recordbox through WINE without significant tinkering.
I've never had an issue with ccache and I've been using it forever. Are you using it over a networked filesystem or something like that for it to become confused about what needs recompiling?
I do understand the core message but I don't get why the author seems upset about it. Sounds like people complaining that instagram models show fake "fake" life. LinkedIn is a social network. Professionals show off how successful and hirable they are, or companies show how nice it is to work there.
I personally can't take this self promotion that has become very necessary in many parts of our industry so I stay clear of places where it is exercised.
Self promotion is understandable. But the core message in this is that people calling their past choices as strategy on why they did what they did instead of accepting that it was because of constraints, luck or just the situation.
Often these things lead to wrong motivations for people who consider them as experts
> Then, it's the "leaders" (the top brass - founders, etc) who decide that things have gone too far and we need to make brutal 10% cuts across the board.
I agree with the general sentiment of your points, but aren't those 10-20-30% layoffs an attempt to make the bottom line look better before the call with the investors? In my experience most layoffs have a goal to reduce spend by X rather than churn underperformers. And often times managers aren't even allowed to target based on merit, but on some weird metric which is a mixture of compensation and impact.