I'm transitioning to Channels (with HDHomerun) from TiVo and absolutely loving it. But we also have hundreds of hours of recorded content that would be nice to fold into the Channels experience.

Given there are potentially millions of current TiVo users about to be orphaned, are there any plans to being able to integrate with a TiVo box on the same network? It would be awesome to merge that content in with my growing Channels library. And it would be a great way to pick up new customers too.

I got my new UTR and am pretty happy with it overall. But I can't figure out how to get it to Teleport into my AmpliFi Alien router. There's a spot where you can enter a Teleport shared link, but not a way to use the 5-character code. Is there a way to turn that code into a link? Or maybe this just isn't supported yet?

Has anyone else gotten their UTR to Teleport back to an AmpliFi router?

I started with a TRAID with 3 disks, 1TB+1TB+0.5TB. It was showing 1.34TB in the TRAID which seems about right (1.5TB usable + 1.0TB redundant)/1.1.

Then I added a 3rd 1TB drive and the usable space is still 1.34TB!! Why? I expected it to increase to something like 2TB at least.

Wouldn't you expect it to at least increase a little? 1.34TB is only 42% of the total disk space 1.34 / (3.5/1.1). What should I do?

p.s. I think the TRAID calculator is plain wrong and don't trust it. It suggests I should have 2.5TB... I wish!

UPDATE: I got it to work! In case someone else runs into this problem and sees this post I thought I'd share what I did.

My system disk was set to live on the smaller (SSD) disk on the theory that the SSD would be faster. But I suspected the TRAID was confused by the oddly sized disk. So here's what I did:

• moved the system to one of the bigger HDD disks
• rebooted, still no change in the pool size
• decided to "replace" the smaller disk with itself in hopes it would resize
• the instructions said to just take out the disk you want to replace so I yanked it out, then the NAS started beeping with no clear instructions on what to do next. So I put it back in and rebooted
• DISASTER!? the machine wouldn't boot back up. I was very sad but I tried rebooting with the "replacement" disk out of the NAS. Then, thankfully, it booted up and was beeping. This time I was happy to hear that beep because it meant my NAS wasn't dead.
• Then I re-inserted the SSD disk and the pool gladly welcomed it back into the family and resized the pool! It's a miracle!
• Now the storage pool size has increased from 1.34TB to 1.79TB, an increase of 650GB.
• Again, the TRAID calculator doesn't match reality. It says (image below) that TRAID should provide about 2.51TB but it's closer to the RAID5 number of 1.54TB. But at this point I'm not complaining because I have more storage than before which was the main goal.

https://preview.redd.it/f2zjnzwry8eh1.png?width=2472&format=png&auto=webp&s=f02151cc82644f17f64bc7771bb542e3e7060011

I have a TerraMaster brand NAS that I'd like to install the DVR storage software on. But the instructions require a Windows PC to do the installation. Sadly, I don't have a Windows PC.

I'm technically savvy. Is there a list of instructions somewhere that I could follow to manually install the software on my TerraMaster NAS? I can't imagine it's more than a handful of terminal commands to run.

Alternatively, maybe there's a docker container somewhere that could do the installation?

Edit: If I have to, I could run a Windows emulator but I thought I'd ask here first before going down that path.

Background

Here in Colorado we had a disappointing but predictable outcome in our election for Attorney General. We had 4 total candidates, 3 of whom are very qualified attorneys and the 4th candidate who is a term-limited Secretary of State with name recognition but is barely qualified to be the AG. The name-recognition candidate received about 45% of the votes and the other "good" candidates split the vote pretty evenly between 16% and 20%.

This election sadly illustrates there are a lot of low-information voters who just checked the box by the name they were familiar with. And the winner didn't even participate in the debates because she knew she could coast on her notoriety.

Proposal

This got me thinking, because they participated in multiple debates, I'm sure the losing candidates all knew each other very well and knew who was the most/least qualified for the job. So what if we let the candidates help decide the race after they are eliminated by allocating their losing votes, in a Ranked-Choice manner, to the person they feel should get the job? They are after all the highest-information voters in that they spend a lot of time with each other in debates and know each other's strengths and weaknesses.

Mechanics

Simply speaking, the vote occurs just like any other FPTP election. Everyone votes for their favorite candidate. If your favorite candidate loses, it's not a "throw-away" vote because that candidate gets to rank their favorites of the remaining candidates so your vote would then be transferred to the candidate of their choosing, and so on.

Example

Initial election results are as follows:

• Jena = 45% (ranks Hetal, David, Michael)
• Michael = 20% (ranks David, Hetal, Jena)
• David = 18% (ranks Hetal, Michael, Jena)
• Hetal = 16% (ranks David, Michael, Jena)

Round 2: Hetal is deemed to be in last place and her votes are sent to her highest ranked concession ranking of David.

• Jena = 45%
• David = 34%
• Michael = 20%

Round 3: Michael is out and his votes go to David and the winner is...

• David = 54%
• Jena = 45%

Variation

Instead of ranking the other candidates, each candidate might be able to distribute their votes based on percentages.

Conclusion

I don't think this is as good as RCV generally but it allows people to hold onto their stupid FPTP voting ballots until they get used to the idea of ranking. Also, I like the idea of candidates ranking each other because they tend to know each other in ways that the voters can't possibly know them.

What do you think? Has this sort of system been proposed already?

This AG election could be the perfect illustration of why we need a Ranked Choice Vote (RCV). We have 4 total candidates. Three of those candidates seem well-qualified to be our next AG, and the other candidate is much less qualified and running primarily on name recognition.

My fear is that the 3 best candidates will be in a dead heat, each with about 23% of the vote, and the less qualified candidate will win with 31% of the vote just because of their notoriety. If we had a ranked choice vote, then the name-recognition candidate would likely fall to the wayside during one of the rounds of the RCV process.

So, I'm having a hard time deciding who to pick. I want to vote for the well-qualified candidate who has the best chance to win. So I have set up a little informal RCV vote that will inform my vote. And maybe you can use it to inform your own vote, that's up to you. If we work together, maybe we can get one of the better-qualified AG candidate elected.

Here's a link to my informal vote: https://www.rcv123.org/ballot/X4gRX4R95JqHMCpQgRj5R48m

It should only allow you to vote once, but of course, it's not perfectly secure. Please don't try to cheat. Be better.