I’ve used shelves for them in the past.
Using sticky velcro makes it easy to move things as you need.

I’ve also used lacing bars to cable tie (or velcro strap) them to.

Sometimes it just gets a bit messy.

I try to buy equipment that has integrated PSUs (so everything is on IEC).
For everything else, I try to find an inline POE adapter (you get them to USB, as well as a few standard voltages and barrel-dc plugs). Has the benefit of not using up power sockets, and lets you power cycle it from your network switch.

Why?
I’ve tried to Google this, but it’s such a general statement I can’t find anything about it.
Is it more mature in that regard? Sane/sensible/safe defaults for networking? More tools as part of the distribution for networking?
Did FreeBSD (or it’s predecessor/upstream/whatever) define the standards, so the implementation is more correct?

Or is it just that so many firewall applications run on top of FreeBSD (or a BSD flavour) eg opnSense, pfSense, openWRT (is openWRT actually BSD, idk)?
So, kinda a historical/momentum thing. With the benefits of wide spread specific use

This has been made by so many packages, they would be silly not to incorporate their work - licence dependent of course.

Edit - wait, not the exploit thing. The .env file thing

Why not just throw an error?
Catch it higher up the chain, and return that as the response.
Which would essentially the “early return” methodology. The final return of a function is the happy path, everything else is tested for and thrown as an error before hand (or returns a different value depending on the structure).

I don’t know why further parts in a chain (or “2 track railway”) of methods would want to process an error.
Like, why not just have the error instantly return to the client.

Maybe, for things like input validation, having a list of errors would be useful (IE email is invalid, passwords don’t match, password must be 8 characters, and accept TOS).
Even then, that is a validation step. The main chain of processing shouldn’t care if there is 1 or 5 errors. Validation doesn’t pass, return the validation error.

The only reason I can see is if you have some response handler that can accept an error or data, and you don’t want to write a try/except, or you don’t want to abstract the try/except to some parent method, or you find that try/excepts have some critical performance penalty that is wholey unacceptable.

I feel like this 9 year old solution is looking for a problem, or is an example of working within strange constraints, or is just an idea/example for a specific talk.
Maybe it’s just being purely functional for the sakw of being functional?

Idk. Maybe I just don’t get functional programming?

I disagree.
Users likely trust their instances admins

“cookie consent” is such a misnomer. It’s actually about tracking.
https://www.iubenda.com/en/help/5525-cookies-gdpr-requirements#What-else-is-covered-by-the-Cookie-Law,-apart-from-cookies

Vaultwarden is the unofficial open source backend that’s compatible with bitwarden clients.
But $10 a year is nothing, and it removes a lot of worries

I need inspiration and guidance on my investigation roll to read this deep fried meme.

Reminds me of the /r/HTML community. It’s only purpose was a catchall to guide new programmers to appropriate communities.

I did a quick Google.
https://web.eece.maine.edu/~vweaver/group/green_machines.html

Is the best actual test data I can find. It uses a physical power meter, so it’s full system (not TDP or self reporting power consumption).
And it’s a few years out of date.
Seems like Apple silicon is the winner (and will probably continue to be).
The Xeon that beats the rpi4 for GFLOPS/watt is an e5v3, which was launched in 2013 and EOL in 2021.
So there will absolutely be some new Xeon CPUs that will perform better.

However, for a $50 device, it’s probably the best GFLOPS/watt/$ from what little empirical data I can find