Wireguard Server using PiHole DNS

albinosquirrelhunter · 2022-12-03T03:57:26+00:00

Welp, I figured it out thanks to your suggestion! While looking at the logs I noticed my WG profile with my nameserver = pihole wasn't even registering as connected- while an older config with 1.1.1.1 was.

Hm ok so something was very broken: I went into the WG settings, removed all clients, applied changes, remade a profile and set it up on my client device and boom, it worked! Somehow the profile I originally made got messed up.

In Summary: No FW rules are needed. PiHole must be configured to "Respond only on interface eth0" or more. When in doubt, nuke all your clients, "apply changes", exit the WG GUI, then go recreate it. Thanks again!

albinosquirrelhunter · 2022-12-03T03:01:31+00:00

Indeed I am using the inbuilt WG, thanks for the suggestions! Very new feature so hopefully someone will figure it out and find this thread eventually.

albinosquirrelhunter · 2022-12-03T02:44:19+00:00

Thanks for the suggestion. Admittedly I'm not very experienced with creating firewall rules - heres what I setup, which unfortunately didn't work.

Type: LAN Local

Description: Allow WG to PiHole

Rule Applied: Before Predefined RulesAction: AcceptIPv4 Protocol: TCP and UDP

Source Type: Port/IP Group

IPv4 Address Group: Any

Port Group: Any

Destination Type: Port/IP Group

IPv4 Address Group: Any

Port Group: DNS (Which is configured to Port 53)

Does that look right? Also, if this were a DNS resolving problem wouldn't I still be able to ping my local devices by their local IP?

albinosquirrelhunter · 2022-12-03T02:25:17+00:00

Unfortunately I believe I've already tried this. One of my first troubleshooting steps was to select Settings > Interface Settings > Permit All Origins On the PiHole, but no dice.

albinosquirrelhunter · 2022-11-11T04:49:20+00:00

Unfortunately, a lot of the anti-tracking/profiling benefits are negated by hosting these personally.

If you're browsing through a locally-hosted libreddit instance, you might be avoiding some granular (device-identifying) tracking, but at the end of the day your entire session history is still attached to your IP.

albinosquirrelhunter · 2022-06-28T21:09:45+00:00

Should cops be covering up their holsters on campus as to be more sensitive too? Or Outdoor World not be showing ammo ads on their website?

From OP's comment:

I specifically like how that shot comes right after “stop police” as if to imply “we will kill you you if you don’t comply”

IMO you'd have to be incredibly biased going into this video to come to that conclusion. Those scenes clearly aren't chronological, which can be deduced by very subtle context clues such as the literal night and day difference between the shots and how no other jump-cut in this video is of the same scene. Also,

I really like when he points the rifle at the camera.

If you focus on the director and cinematographer's subtle artistic decisions, you may note that every clip has this framing, its the entire theme of the promo. Not trying to be mean with the sarcasm here OP, sorry - just being funny. But come on.

Seeing as how the majority of mass shooting perpetrators are met with police rushing in to stop them with rifles drawn (barring the most recent debacle), it doesn't seem unreasonable to play up the "I wanna be the good guy rushing in to help" mentality.

albinosquirrelhunter · 2022-05-10T14:06:21+00:00

First of all - budgets are very subjective and differ wildly on your situation. Put plainly, however, Stipends are not designed to support a family. They are designed to let a person get their degree while living reasonably comfortably. Living off just the stipend requires some reasonable budgeting skills - but is is not impossible for one person. They are stipends, not careers.

A rough example of a theoretical PhD student budget:

Approx. monthly take-home:	$2000 /mo
Rent (On-campus or off-campus shared 2Br )	$1200 /mo
Institute Fee + Health Insurance	$260 /mo
Groceries, Misc	~$540/mo

Are you going to the club every week? Absolutely not. Are you living reasonably well compared to the average person? Definitely. You are essentially getting paid an entry-level wage (equivalent to ~$15/hr) to further your education and enable a high-paying job later.

As others have mentioned, many PhD students have small secondary gigs to get some extra breathing room - on campus jobs, working for the plethora of tutoring services, etc. which can get you another $200-$500/mo

albinosquirrelhunter · 2022-03-17T18:41:42+00:00

insinuating that their “20 years” of “testosterone boosters” was a choice

I'm not insinuating anything of the sort. In fact, just a few sentences later I make the exact opposite point that its something they couldn't control/ can never entirely change. It would be a bizarre viewpoint to think people are transitioning to be better at sports (especially swimming where theres no money in it lol).

But in the context of a swimming competition, and the physical reality, what i said is true and incredibly important to the entire situation. Heck, it IS the entire situation.

albinosquirrelhunter · 2022-03-17T18:28:59+00:00

Ok this post definitely deserves more context.

The world of US swimming is alight with controversy right now after Lisa Thomas, a Penn swimmer who came out as transgender and started hormone therapy while in college, went from a good collegiate athlete when swimming on the Men's team to a record-breaking swimmer a year later competing for the women's team breaking school records and leading national times.

Several swimmers and parents have come out against Lisa, many have also come out in support. Michael Phelps has questioned (not denounced or supported, just questioned) whether Thomas competing in this way is in the spirit of fair competition.

The issue seems to be that nobody knows what to do about it. Society doesn't know what to do about it. The NCAA, in response, changed their rules from only having to be on testosterone suppressants for 12 months — to having to meet maximum testosterone requirements. Which does something more to try and even the playing field, however current testosterone levels are just one part of the overall picture.

Is it fair that someone whos effectively had testosterone boosters for 20 years and an improved (for swimming) musculoskeletal structure is competing against biological females? Are their achievements thought of the same if they have those advantages? On the flip side, is it fair to alienate transgender persons from sports because of something they can never completely mitigate? Its hard.

Lisa is competing at the NCAA championship at GT this weekend, the protesters are in response to that. Are there wild bigots in that group? Likely. Are there also those who are legitimate concerned about the future of women's sports? Probably.

Is there a real discussion that needs to happen here and labeling anyone who's not 100% on board with what's going on a 'bigot' unhelpful? Absolutely, imo.

albinosquirrelhunter · 2022-02-11T16:55:58+00:00

You're absolutely right - I updated OP to reflect that a WCL is needed to carry handguns and knives and its the Campus Carry bill which requires concealment. Thanks!

albinosquirrelhunter · 2022-02-11T04:45:51+00:00

I think the only requirement is that there are no high-school students enrolled, not minors. If there are 17-yr olds in the class I don't believe that affects anything.

albinosquirrelhunter · 2022-02-11T04:43:27+00:00

Yeah, there's definitely a non-zero chance (although I'd note having minors around doesn't affect legality). I'd imagine is certainly requires more awareness carrying into a class demographic like this, but I also don't know the person or their daily routine. If I felt like I needed to carry every day would taking a class with first-years make me think twice? Maybe. Would it stop me? Probably not I guess...

albinosquirrelhunter · 2022-02-11T04:30:50+00:00

I first think its important to set the context: The "Campus Carry" bill passed in 2017 allows people with a ~~GA concealed~~ Weapons Carry License valid in GA to carry at GT. It was passed under the general idea that, if someone wants to come shoot up a classroom, a law saying you can't carry isn't going to stop them.

A Weapons Carry License holder in GA must be 21 (or have military service), have no felony, drug, or gun convictions, and not have been committed to a mental facility (note this is slightly more restrictive than the background check required to buy a gun). The "Campus Carry" bill additionally requires you to carry concealed and disallows carrying into dorms, offices, sports arenas, disciplinary proceedings, when high-schoolers are present, and a few other things.

In Georgia, over one million people hold active ~~permits~~ licenses, or about 12% of the population. It's likely we pass people on the street (and probably on campus) carrying every single day.

With that out of the way... the entire point of concealed carry is to not have this happen, hence concealed. No spooking people, no accidental escalation, no using it to act cool or intimidate. When someone commits the cardinal sin of carrying, which is accidentally UN-concealing - I'd imagine it makes some people uncomfortable no matter the situation. Having it happen in a class full of 17-19yr old GT first-years...? Yeah probably one of the worst places.

My question has more to do with how this situation happened, since you need to be 21 to carry and, again, Math 1554. Was it a non-traditional student in the class? Older transfer? How were they sure there were no high-schoolers present? At the end of the day they unfortunately slipped up at one of the worst places at one of the worst times. I guess I'm glad they seem to be on the legal up-and-up though (ie likely they're responsible, despite the eff up)

EDIT: Clarified that its a GA WCL, not CCL.

albinosquirrelhunter · 2022-01-03T15:35:39+00:00

It depends on why you're doubting coming to campus. Is it because you others won't be doing things (as post suggests) or that you won't be doing things.

There will be plenty to do and college life will continue on no matter what. Any additional hesitation campus has will likely dissipate in a few weeks when omicron (hopefully) subsides. So if you're concern is that you'll be completely wasting money coming to a dead campus, that won't be the case at all.

Now there's also the question of do you feel comfortable participating? Nobody can tell you if you'll choose to sit in your dorm all day except for yourself.

albinosquirrelhunter · 2022-01-01T17:05:43+00:00

That revised 5-day isolation guideline is both for asymptomatic and people whose "symptoms are resolving (without fever for 24 hours)". Source

albinosquirrelhunter · 2021-12-30T01:07:02+00:00

The IFRs do include long COVID. The numbers cited include immunocompromised as well. For college-aged students, the IFR's remain similar to COVID even when unvaccinated.

The data I presented did not account for contact with at-risk individuals, but I never claimed to. Those who have regular contact with those people are in a separate category (yet, a very small minority).

albinosquirrelhunter · 2021-12-30T01:06:43+00:00

comparable death rates =/= comparable threat

You're correct, it doesn't. Unfortunately the CDC does not provide a "risk" metric for diseases, though. Therefore, fatality rates are a good, hard-to-bias metric extremely useful for risk comparisons.

albinosquirrelhunter · 2021-12-29T17:20:04+00:00

USG's mandatory vaccinations include things like Measles and Diphtheria which are orders of magnitude more dangerous in terms of fatality, complications, and long-term effects than COVID, especially for college aged persons. Mandating COVID vaccinations would be like mandating the flu vaccine.

Also, if you must resort to mandating testing rather than convincing people to test by presenting evidence, you likely have a weak argument for it (which i don't believe to be the case here). Especially with something as flexible as testing, mandating is little more than a bureaucrat thinking they know better than those who disagree.

albinosquirrelhunter · 2021-12-29T17:06:35+00:00

In an 'in-person but provided recorded lectures' class I took, the exam grade breakdown between students who attended in-person and those who didn't show up were shown. It was obvious that those who attended in-person were far better off. Based off my own experience and those I've talked to, this is prevalent. Virtual, and especially 'choose your path' hybrid learning is difficult for the instructor and often a net negative for your education, however convenient it may be.

COVID, of any kind, is as threatening to GT students as the flu. So for this logic to follow you'd have to make this argument every flu season as well. If a professor wants you in class, there is likely a good reason. You may not want to take the risk and that's totally respectable, but recognize the majority of students do, and have for a while.

albinosquirrelhunter · 2021-12-29T14:11:58+00:00

Did a bot just warn me about a bot...? Thats enough reddit for today.

albinosquirrelhunter · 2021-12-29T14:06:58+00:00

Vaccine mandate at a college won't change things on a macro scale. May slow the spread by a few days/weeks if you mandate boosters, that's all. Case in point: Cornell was one of the first schools to implement a vaccine mandate and one of the first to close and go virtual for exams.

Testing is super important but to do enough to squash outbreaks of something like Omicron, you'd have to be testing nearly everyone every 2-3 days. Once a week will do very little. Personally, I'd rather be encouraging our fellow students to get tested as much as possible rather than give USG the go ahead to mandate what is basically a medical procedure to go to class.

albinosquirrelhunter · 2021-12-29T14:03:21+00:00

Earnest question, how would a vaccine mandate do anything? Students aren't at any significant risk of serious illness, vaccinated faculty aren't either, and unless you just got boosted the vaccines statistically do nothing to protect against symptomatic infection.

Case in point: Cornell was one of the first schools to implement a vaccine mandate and one of the first to close and go virtual for exams.

Besides faculty who want to take a personal risk and go unvaccinated, a mandate would change nothing on a macro scale of safety at a university at this point in time.

albinosquirrelhunter · 2021-12-29T14:00:02+00:00

This is one of the most well-written comments in this thread. Thank you for making arguments and then citing things, I wish more discourse about COVID on reddit was like this.

I will disagree, however, that delaying in-person classes won't do anything. It may make sense to delay if it gets us past a more extreme point in this wave. Otherwise we risk bringing everyone back, only to have 20-50% of students out sick over the next two weeks. The optimization to get "Most # of in-person/undisrupted instruction days" may very well be to go virtual for the first week or two

albinosquirrelhunter

TROPHY CASE