towerful

Whether it's using tailscale, wireguard, SSH tunnels, any other VPN, it's all RPoVPN

Cloudflare is popular, as they also provide something called Tunnels.
Essentially, your domain points to their public IP, and your server connects to their server. This way, you aren't opening ports on your home network, you aren't leaking your home IP, and they provide various protections against DDOS and stuff.
Only issue is it's for HTTP(s) traffic, and it's cloudflare that terminates SSL so they could inspect your traffic if they wanted to (indeed this is how their various security systems work).

Tailscale offer something similar, I believe.
Some people run their own Reverse Proxy over VPN (RPoVPN), using a VPS as the entry/exit point.

These have the benefit of letting you essentially run a separate network from your home network, more security options with little initial configuration to do, not having to publish your home IP address.

The old school way is to use a Dynamic DNS provider, and open/forward the relevant port(s) on your router.
Most DNS providers have this ability.
You would then run a service on your server(s) that updates the DNS with your IP address incase of a dynamic IP address. Or you can rent a static IP address from your ISP.
There are many DNS providers. I use CloudNS, but it's a bit clunky. Cloudflare provide DNS. I'm sure there are loads of others.

Which is why it needs to become illegal

That's exactly it.
https://blog.cloudflare.com/post-mortem-on-cloudflare-control-plane-and-analytics-outage/

Here is a quick summary, but the actual postmortem is worth reading.
Classic example of cascade failure or domino effect. Luckily their resilience wasn't a full outage

Basically, new features get developed fast and are iterated quickly. When they mature, they get integrated into the high availability cluster.
There are also some services that are deliberately not clustered. One of which is logging, which should cause logs to pile up "at the edge" when the logging core service is down.
Unfortunately, some services were too tightly coupled to the logging core. So they should've been HA clustered, but were unable to cope with the core logging service being down.
Whilst HA failover had been tested, the core services has never been taken offline, so all this was missed.

Which all ended up with inconsistent high-availability amongst different services and products. A lot of new features would have failed as expected, and some mature features that shouldn't have failed did.

When they brought their disaster recovery site up, there were some things that needed manual configuration, and some newer features that hadn't been tested in a disaster recovery scenario.

They are now focusing significant resources on:

• Remove dependencies on our core data centers for control plane configuration of all services and move them wherever possible to be powered first by our distributed network.
• Ensure that the control plane running on the network continues to function even if all our core data centers are offline.
• Require that all products and features that are designated Generally Available must rely on the high availability cluster (if they rely on any of our core data centers), without having any software dependencies on specific facilities.
• Require all products and features that are designated Generally Available have a reliable disaster recovery plan that is tested.
• Test the blast radius of system failures and minimize the number of services that are impacted by a failure.
• Implement more rigorous chaos testing of all data center functions including the full removal of each of our core data center facilities.
• Thorough auditing of all core data centers and a plan to reaudit to ensure they comply with our standards.
• Logging and analytics disaster recovery plan that ensures no logs are dropped even in the case of a failure of all our core facilities.

It's a meme?

It's more like using some "long distance extra penetrating paintballs" instead of the usual bursting paintballs.
It's most likely "let's get UV lights for fluorescent paints and stuff".
Except getting disinfecting UV lights (probably popularised due to COVID) instead of safe UV Cannons.

I've never encountered lights that don't have UV filters in them.
There's no way to control the UV filter via DMX/Artnet/sACN. It's a fixed dichroic filter in front of the discharge lamp. It's an extremely cheap filter, as well, so I doubt it would be excluded from cheapo knock-off brand lights.
Certainly on any light available in the US and EU. It just won't get certified for sale.

Besides which, I haven't used a discharge lamp in years. It's all LED now, even the cheap stuff.

There is no way "set channel 4 to full" would disable any safety features in a moving light that would allow it to output damaging UV light. And the only other way it would hurt someone is if it was focussed on them, and they actively stared into it. Like, staring at the sun kind of level of staring at a light.

So, get rid of that "ordinary stage lights" pish.

This is absolutely a case of "we should get UV lights". And instead of getting safe UV cannons for fun florescent paints, they got UV disinfectant lights. Probably still makes florescent paints glow, but it's the wider band UV stuff designed to kill biological cells (ie disinfect). Which is exactly what it did to people's skin and retina.

The date API is like the original rip of the Java date API. Barely changed, and totally backwards compatible nonsense.

Temporal is the new JavaScript/ECMAScript date API.
It's stage 3, and likely stable (just a few kinks being worked out). So you could polyfill it for production.
https://github.com/tc39/proposal-temporal

String based date processing

Client side hashing of a password just makes the hashed result the password, as far as security is concerned.
Unless there is some back-and-forth with the server providing a one-time-use salt or something to make each submission of the password unique and only valid once, at which point that might get snooped as well.
Better off relying on client certificates if you are that concerned

For A4, I always recommend Brother printers.
If you can spend for a laser printer, it is SOO worth it.

I had a fancy inkjet. The problem is I didnt use it often, so when I did use it I got really bad result.
It was also slow, and the ink was expensive.

So, I thought about buying a new one.
Fresh ink and replacement print heads were going to be more than the cost of a new printer anyway.

I looked into it and bought a brother A4 colour laser. A quick Google shows them to be currently ~£250.
I have had that printer for years. I rarely print anything. But when I do, the image is as good as when I bought it.

Checking the printer stats, I've printed 430 pages. Wear and tear is at 98% (IE 2% used of drum/belt/fuser/feeder lifespan).
The black toner is 40%, and the colour toners are 80%.
3rd party toners are £30 per color, and apparently yield 2500 pages. So more expensive than 3rd part ink cartridges, but the yield is significantly more!
Overall more expensive. But the reliability is outstanding!

Edit:
Well, all this printer talk, I thought I should update the firmware.
Brother only provide a dmg for OSX 10.7.
So, that's a pretty huge drawback!
Edit again:
Nope, I'm an idiot. Found the link for W10 update tool.
All updated, and over the network too!

That's why it's containers... in containers

It's like wearing 2 helmets. If 1 helmet is good, imagine the protection of 2 helmets!