fix: (some) bad grammar

Also add anotehr disclaimer. This was not very well written.

README.md

@@ -13,11 +13,18 @@ docker run --rm -it -p 8080:8080 wip hugo serve --bind 0.0.0.0 --port 8080
 ### Opinion Pieces
  - [ ] Clean Architecture is stupid - dependency injection is king
  - [ ] Neorg is bad, actually - ?? is king
+ - [ ] Clean Architecture is stupid and overly complicated - dependency injection is king
+ - [ ] For want of a neater (human) internet
+ - [ ] A truly FOSS printer.
+       even the hardware should be FOSS. - most parts should be 3d printable.
+       should be a laser printer, as inkjet is stupid.
+ - [ ] A truly FOSS eink reader.
+ - [ ] VIM Bindings everywhere please
 
 ### Digital Soverignty
  - [x] how to host a blog
  - [ ] how to securely "self-host" using a VPS, portainer and traefik
- - [ ] how to configure neomutt
+ - [x] how to configure neomutt
  - [ ] how to securely host a mail server
 
 ### Old sillyblog

content/posts/avr-memory-model.md

@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ gdb: > x/16xb my_heap_object
 ```
 
 The first bytes at address `0x800100` are `0a` and `00`. These bytes are the *free-list* entry and explains how "big"
-the object is. When reading this, we have to remember that the model is littleengine-based (meaning that the bytes are
+the object is. When reading this, we have to remember that the model is little endian-based (meaning that the bytes are
 switched), 
 so we actually have the value of `0x000a`, meaning `10` in decimal. This makes a lot of sense, since we allocated 5
 `int`s, that is of size 2 (16bit integers). 

content/posts/computation-in-nature.md

@@ -0,0 +1,90 @@
++++
+date = '2018-05-10'
+draft = false
+title = 'Computation in Nature'
+tags = ['philosophy', 'old']
+categories = ['opinion']
++++
+
+## Disclaimer
+
+This was written as a student project as part of our ethics course, where we had to write an opinion piece on anything
+we wanted in the field of computer science. Note that this was before *LLM*'s was a thing. I also apologize if the
+wording is off - this was written in an afternoon as a rush-job. I still think it's an interesting read though.
+
+# Computation in Nature
+
+> "If you ever think your code is bad, just remember that CPUs are just rocks that we tricked into thinking"
+
+**Does nature compute, or is computation something that only humans are doing? If so, what is it about?**
+
+To answer this question, we would need to define what the terms used in it even means.  If you look up the definition
+of the word ’compute’ on Merriam Websters dictionary, you find that it primarily means _"to determine
+especially by mathematical means"_. This definition mentions a usage of mathematics, which suggests a close bond
+between these concepts.  What would it mean to determine something? I would argue that it means to make a decision
+based on either prior experience, data or calculations. This implies that computation have a focus on deciding
+and _"finishing a thought"_. It has an end goal. You can even use conclusions made by previous computations to
+compute more advanced problems.
+
+In other words, computation is about answering queries about data and the process of doing so.  We see
+mathematics emerge in nature aswell. In
+[The Chemical Basis of Morphogenesis](https://www.dna.caltech.edu/courses/cs191/paperscs191/turing.pdf), Alan M. Turing
+mentions that flower petals rarely exceeds a quantity of five. We even see the fibonacci sequence in [sunflower
+seeds](http://popmath.org.uk/rpamaths/rpampages/sunflower.html).
+
+An example of computation in nature is actually very easy to find. Take a rabbit, or any other smaller prey. A rabbit
+is constantly observing and reacting to the sorrounding environment, otherwise it gets eaten by predators or fall
+into a lake and drown or any other scenario involving death. You could argue that the rabbit is constantly asking
+questions about what to: _"Should I run away?"_, _"Should I keep eating?"_, _"Should I be eating this?"_ etc. The
+rabbit may not be consciously aware of these queries, but nevertheless, it is answering to them through actions.
+
+In Empiricism, the concept of a mind being a blank slate (in this case we are talking about a human mind, not
+a rabbit’s), which remembers experiences throughout it's life is very much applicable here. This trait means that a
+human mind has a memory, i.e. It can remember old conclusions and recall them when desired. We can actually prove that
+this trait is not exclusive to humans, since we can observe other mammals (and even fish and reptiles) demonstrating
+the usage of memory. A prime example is the elephant, but pretty much any animal applies here.
+
+In Rationalism, we see a similar pattern that mimics memory - using the method of deduction to find conclusions and
+deduct new conclusions. However, if you were to believe the Rationalists, getting the data needed for computation
+in nature, may be a tricky task. We previously had an assumption that we could trust our senses and that other
+creatures also had senses. In Rationalism the only thing we can trust is the fact that we are doubting. Since we
+can’t say anything about if the rabbit is doubting everything. This is where the rabbit example breaks down a
+little, but we are not completely stuck here. Humans are mammals and mammals are a type of animal. Animals are
+part of nature, therefore humans must be part of nature. You and I are humans (I assume) and this logic enables us
+to make deductive arguments based on subjective thoughts. The first part of the Cartesian circle, _"Dubito ergo
+cogito"_ (_"I doubt, therefore I think"_) made by René Descartes, is actually very applicable to computation in
+nature. Thinking is a form of computation and since _I_ am part of nature. Computation rationally happens in nature.
+
+But what about non-natural computation? Artificial computation machines such as modern digital computers or even
+old mechanical adding-machines are definitely things that compute data. There is a diconnect from artificial
+computers to natural computers (brains) though. Currently humans have not been able to produce a machine with natural
+intuition as we observe it in nature. We have come close to something that looks like it with simulated organisms,
+but we are not even close to the complexeties of an intuitive brain such as the human one (or even other clever
+mammals, such as the dolphin or chimp). I personally believe that the reason for this disconnect is because of
+the intention of the computational device at the point of origin. The intent that biology had when brains were
+invented was certainly not to fix mathematical problems. It was primarily for the organism to survive and have a
+better chance for survival. But fixing mathematical problems is the exact intent humans had when we created our
+artificial computers. This **intent** changes the very nature of the system, and because of this, even though brains
+and computers might be similar in some ways they are and always will be fundamentally different things.
+
+A. M. Turing presents (and disagrees with) various arguments, in his article
+[Computing Machinery and Intelligence](https://archive.org/details/MIND--COMPUTING-MACHINERY-AND-INTELLIGENCE),
+that a computer will not be able to be conscious. I tend to follow Turings idea that most of the arguments he
+presents are either made out of a tendency towards thinking that humans have to be superior to machines, either
+intellectually or that we can *feel* things. I do disagree with one point that he makes in the article: Turing
+argues that a computer/program will never be able to change it’s behavior based off of prior experiences, which
+sounds ludicrous if you’ve taken any modern Machine Intelligence class. This was probably a conclusion he came
+to because of the time era he was in and that AI as a field was not as big (if at all existent) at the time.
+
+Turing finishes the article with the notion that there is still a lot of work to be done in the field of AI and it
+is a fun contrast to see what arguments and thoughts a mind like his had back in the fifties, compared to modern
+AI can offer. Will humans ever be able to create a truly conscious artificial mind? And will we ever be able to
+test it properly?
+
+If you believe the Mathematical Realists, mathematics is a thing that exists independently of humans, and can be
+found/discovered by any being clever enough to deduct these laws. This point of view can be very reassuring, if
+you believe that real artificial intelligence can be made.  Since mathematics is an inherit trait of the universe,
+and that computers are machines that can (essentially) execute math, and that humans are part of nature. It might
+be possible to make an AI that is (atleast) as clever as humans, maybe it is innevitable.
+
+{{< centered image="/6616144.png" >}}

content/posts/how-to-portainer.md

@@ -0,0 +1,78 @@
++++
+date = '2024-12-04'
+draft = true
+title = "How to Host Docker Containers Easily in The Cloud"
+tags = ["howto", "tutorial", "web"]
+categories = ["technical"]
++++
+
+In this post, we will be going over how to set up a [portainer]() managed docker environment, and how to use it.
+This is ideal if you want to host a personal website, a [blog](/posts/how-to-blog), a personal [github](git.gtz.dk) or whatever your development heart desire.
+If you choose to follow along, by the end of it, you will have an environment where you can just add or remove docker based services. It's even quite secure!
+
+## Portainer
+
+## Traefik
+
+## Keycloak
+
+## Automatic backups
+
+## TODOs
+ - [ ] 2FA the control dashboards through keycloak
+ - [ ] geoblocking the control dashboards
+ - [ ] start the article with a demo of what we'll be making
+ - MAYBE:
+   - [ ] portainer introduction (maybe)
+   - [ ] traefik introduction (maybe)
+   - [ ] add a "skip if you already know portainer and traefik"
+
+
+```yaml
+services:
+  postgresql:
+    image: postgres:16
+    environment:
+      - POSTGRES_USER=keycloak
+      _ POSTGRES_DB=keycloak
+      - POSTGRES_PASSWORD=secret
+    volumes:
+      - postgres-data:/var/lib/postgresql/data
+    networks:
+      - keycloak
+
+
+  keycloak:
+    image: quay.io/keycloa/keycloak:22
+    restart: always
+    command: start
+    depends_on:
+      - postgresql
+    environment:
+      # traefik handles ssl
+      - KC_PROXY_ADDRESS_FORWARDING=true
+      - KC_HOSTNAME_STRUCT=false
+      - KC_HOSTNAME=keycloak.gtz.dk
+      - KC_PROXY=edge
+      - KC_HTTP_ENABLED=true
+      # connect to the postgres thing
+      - DB=keycloak
+      - DB_URL='jdbc:postgresql://postgres:5432/postgresql?ssl=allow'
+      - DB_USERNAME=keycloak
+      - DB_PASSWORD=secret
+      - KEYCLOAK_ADMIN=admin
+      - KEYCLOAK_ADMIN_PASSWORD=admin
+    networks:
+      - proxy
+      - keycloa
+    labels:
+      - "traefik.enable=true"
+      - port=8080
+
+networks:
+  proxy:
+    external: true
+  keycloak:
+```
+
+{{< centered image="/6616144.png" >}}