The Youtube introduction video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igVscvWAR1s) is a great explanation of the tech and the end where he retrofits it into a Panasonic CF RZ is wild.
TrueNAS is just web-based configuration management. As long as you only use the web UI, your system state can be distilled down to the config file it generates.
If you do a vanilla FreeBSD+samba+NFS+ZFS setup, you'll need to edit several files around the file system, which are easy to forget months down the line in case of adjustment or disaster recovery.
Firefox does do the right thing and seems the most usable browser for private CAs. Chrome and derivatives mostly too, except the problem mentioned about the public suffix list. Mobile clients seem the most broken. I can't get iOS to work well with my private CA packaged into a .mobileconfig, but it could be my error as well.
Another obnoxious behavior is clients enforcing lifetime requirements for domains they have no business imposing their opinion about: .internal and .home.arpa. These are specifically carved out for private use. If I want to roll my own CA with a 2.5.29.30 name constraint extension for one of these domains and hand out a 10 year wildcard certificate, I should be able to without interference from my web browser.
Additionally, Google and the PSL have inadvertently broken .home.arpa on Chrome by misclassifying it as a public suffix, while leaving .internal alone. A wildcard cert for *.home.arpa will not work on Chrome, but *.internal will, despite these two domains being essentially equivalent in purpose.
I use KaTex (https://katex.org/) as part of static site generation, and I get LaTeX quality output (because it duplicates LaTeX's algorithm) using only CSS.
Using the eqn and troff suite in 2025 ... I'll just say there's a better way. LaTeX is arcane enough, but at least it is a universal standard in mathematical publication that it pays off to learn a little.
Yep, the closest I ever got to a SGI was drooling over their product brochures as a kid. The cost of a modest Indy was about the same as a mid-range car. It's hard to grasp as a modern PC user that these workstations could handle classes of problems that contemporary PCs could not, no matter what upgrades you did. Today, it would be like comparing a PC to a TPU-based (or similar ASIC) platform for computing.
From what I've read, Oxide is making racks of servers and has no interest in workstations that an individual would use.