components/PostPreviewCard.vue

@@ -39,6 +39,7 @@ const descText =
     <ContentRenderer :value="post" :excerpt="true" tag="article">
       <template #empty>No excerpt available.</template>
     </ContentRenderer>
+    <!--<p v-if="!post.nopreview" class="m-0">…</p>-->
     <div class="text-right" v-if="!post.nopreview">
       <a
         :href="post._path"

content/blog/2021/introduction-osss.md

@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
+---
+title: An Introduction to the Objective-Subjective Scoring System
+date: 2021-04-14
+tags:
+- misc
+---
+
+It's difficult to fairly judge anything in a manner free from bias. It's even more difficult to do it for abstract and creative works such as literature or stories, as your own personal enjoyment can greatly affect how you view the work and any flaws it might have. The **Objective-Subjective Scoring System (OS3)** attempts to remedy this issue by separating as much bias as possible.
+
+The primary feature of OS3 is that it assigns two scores to a certain work with a small scale: the *objective score* and the *subjective score*, both inclusively ranging from 0 to 3.
+
+<!-- more -->
+
+## The objective score
+
+The objective score should be representative of a work's clear quality relative to other works and how "good" it is. It should be as free from bias as possible and should have clear, defined criteria so that the standard can be consistently applied to other works. Ideally, an objective score should not be controversial and others who consume the same work should assign the same score. A sample criteria which I use for stories is provided below:
+
+- **0:** The story does not meet expectations and contains large character, story, and/or formatting flaws that severely detract from the experience of the story, or worse. The story is *rejected objectively*.
+- **1:** The story nearly fails to meets expectations and contains large character, story, and/or formatting flaws that severely detract from the experience of the story.
+- **2:** The story meets expectations but contains flaws that do not severely detract from the. experience of the story.
+- **3:** The story meets expectations and may contain flaws that do not detract from the experience of the story, or better.
+
+The objective score is relative. To provide a meaningful score, there are only four options so it is easier to assign a certain score. Most typical stories should fall under an objective one or two. To reduce the influence of opinions on the objective score, it should be determined after the subjective score.
+
+## The subjective score
+
+The subjective score is…subjective. It should reflect your personal enjoyment of a work. Similar to the objective score, it should be kept consistent — a work with a subjective three should be without question to be more preferred than one with a subjective two. Clear and defined criteria are helpful here, but not as required as like in determining an objective score. A sample criteria which I use for stories is proided below:
+
+- **0:** The story is not enjoyable and was dropped before completion. The story is *rejected subjectively*.
+- **1:** The story is mildly enjoyable and was completed but likely will not be re-consumed very often if at all.
+- **2:** The story is enjoyable and will be re-consumed from time to time.
+- **3:** The story is very enjoyable and will most certainly be re-consumed fairly often.
+
+## Influences and limitations
+
+The objective of the OS3 is to minimise the impact of the subjective score on the objective score. However, it does nothing to prevent the opposite — which is fine. How "good" a work is likely has a direct impact on your enjoyment of it, anyway. This creates an effect where low objective scores are commonly paired up with low subjective scores, and high objective scores more commonly have high subjective scores.
+
+Although this system can reduce the influence on bias in determining the quality of a work, it is still ultimately up to you to enforce a strict standard and not award works higher objective scores due to liking them more. I've found myself that I've had to reduce objective scores multiple times typically after re-consuming a work and looking at it from a more critical angle.
+
+Happy judging!

content/blog/2021/why-self-host.md

@@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
+---
+title: Why Self-Host?
+date: 2021-04-16
+tags:
+- tech
+---
+
+There are a variety of services out there that make it easy for anyone to set up their own "cloud". From Google Drive for storage to Medium for blogs, there are unlimited options in putting content out there. So aside as a learning experience, why would you take on the burden of running a server on your own machine?
+
+<!-- more -->
+
+## Greater control
+
+The big reason is to have greater control over your data. For those that are more privacy-inclined, not having to subject their content to service providers' terms and conditions may be a boon. You can control who sees your content, precisely how they see it, and reduce any bloat that providers attach to web pages.
+
+Additionally, you gain extremely low-level access to the administration of your server, which can be  helpful if you like to tinker and fix something yourself or would like to make a deep change in how your server is configured at the OS level.
+
+You can integrate different services more easily and run them together — for example, Syncthing ensures all of my music files are constantly kept up-to-date and accessible between my laptop, phone, and Plex.
+
+## Custom services
+
+On the off chance that you have a niche service that the cloud can't provide to you, you might turn to self-hosting. For example, to keep my Kobo up-to-date with any stories I add, I use Calibre-web combined with Syncthing to automatically download books as I add via my computer. It also provides a nice web interface that I can access if I happen to want to read something but don't have any of my personal devices with me.
+
+You can also run things that normally you would have to pay a subscription fee for — large file storage and music/video/game streaming with Nextcloud and Plex/Steam respectively are just a couple of examples. Services that also charge extra for custom domain integration can also be avoided by self-hosting instead if you would like to keep it fancy. Game servers and websites come into mind.
+
+## Limitations
+
+Although self-hosting is certainly fun, it is subject to several issues that make it impractical for most, aside from the hardware and bandwidth/data cost.
+
+Fairly advanced technical knowledge is required to set up such a server and maintain it without breakage. Even so, things do happen — typically after system updates — and there is also a massive time investment in a home server. It is also important to be aware of best security practices on the chance that a malicious actor could use your server to infiltrate your network. With paid services, they can largely guarantee that the underlying operating system will not break on you and that security is taken care of. This is amplified as your website or service becomes more popular.
+
+## Conclusion
+
+Running your own server is a lot of work. But it puts my old computer to good use, and has personally helped me a lot in learning more about how our world today operates, even if I only get a small glimpse in that world. My Optiplex provides a variety of helpful services that I regularly use and some that I would not be able to obtain otherwise in exchange for a large chunk of my time. Depending on your circumstances, however, you might be better off relying on others instead. It's a good idea to weigh the pros and cons of investing any monetary resources or time into such an idea.