FutileRecipe

@FutileRecipe@lemmy.world

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

FutileRecipe, (edited )

it won’t take long for someone to build a Wamazon Linux distro with all the features and none of the crap.

I don’t know what “features” Amazon would include that aren’t somehow directly tied into their store and ease of shopping…aka “crap.” It’s not like they would build a better video/audio driver or something. It would all just be more…advertising and analytics, probably on a cheap platform as hardware has never been their largest source of income, to include Kindles (AWS is, last I checked). Strip those two out of their build and we have essentially an untouched kernel lol, at least that’s how I see it happening.

FutileRecipe, (edited )

No one offered to? Not even the business who runs the site nor the departments within said business who do the testing? From the link:

What we test - Canonical’s QA team performs an extensive set of over 500 OS compatibility focused hardware tests to ensure the best Ubuntu experience. Every aspect of the system is checked and verified.

Regular testing for up to 10 years - Roughly every 3 weeks, Ubuntu releases Stable Release Updates, ensuring a secure and reliable experience. These updates are carefully tested by the Hardware Certification team to make sure that systems work well with Ubuntu.

Our laboratories - Canonical conducts tests in dedicated laboratories, located around the world. The “Ubuntu Certified” label is applied to systems that have been verified and are continuously tested by Canonical throughout the Ubuntu release life cycle.

Sounds like it should be someone’s job at Canonical to update the list/site.

FutileRecipe,

I used for a bit…

What changed?

FutileRecipe,

So does mine (Voyager), and the misswipes is why I disabled it, which thankfully Voyagers allows to be configurable.

FutileRecipe,

I am not sure how to do the Anonymous downloading. I will look into the tools section again

It’s in the advanced section, if I remember right. github.com/qbittorrent/…/Anonymous-Mode

FutileRecipe,

Not a fan of how they say “we didn’t say it’s a backdoor,” but have “secretly share” in the URL and article title.

FutileRecipe, (edited )

A backdoor would imply some sort of external control I’d think…

Yes, technically a backdoor listens: csrc.nist.gov/glossary/term/backdoor

Being able to command a device to send you info or perform tasks is different than the device sending info of its own accord.

In this context, where it’s implied to send without the owner’s knowledge (ignoring the fact it’s documented), not really. The article screams “gotcha!” when in reality it didn’t, so they’re trying to backtrack and downplay their initial response. But I do appreciate their update, it’s just got a PR spin to it.

Edit: if the article was initially written as more of a “did you know” and/or expanding on existing documentation, wouldn’t be an issue. It’s the “it’s secretly stealing” that implies malice which is part of the definition of malware… that’shares a category with backdoor. So splitting hairs in the name of PR.

FutileRecipe,

Which OpenTracks? Google PlayStore has two.

FutileRecipe,

The only time I can think of when it actually made sense for the story…

Never watched I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry?

FutileRecipe,

You’re fine with not targeting an individual and using blanket warrants instead? Even a judge said it was unconstitutional due to it not being individualized, and the EFF says it can implicate innocents. Even Google, who tracks and collects most everything, was reluctant to hand it over.

Sure, this reinvigorated the case, but it has an “ends justify the means” feel to it, which is a slippery slope. But you’re actively endorsing a less privacy friendly stance than Google, of all things. That blows my mind.

FutileRecipe, (edited )

Everything must blow your mind.

Just people in a privacy community advocating for even less privacy than Google, who is decidedly anti-privacy, wants. The company who detests privacy and wants to collect data on everyone said, “this might be private and we shouldn’t go with it,” and you go “nope, it’s not, give it over?” I feel like Google is a very low bar to pass for privacy, and you still tripped on it.

So yes, no matter how much I experience in the world, people advocating for being taken advantage of or having their rights violated (which is what’s happening here) blows my mind, despite running into it semi-constantly.

FutileRecipe,

Assuming they’re talking about what most businesses, especially large ones with huge legal resources, do: exploit loopholes to not pay, or pay reduced, taxes.

FutileRecipe,

It’s been my experience that for most people, Google services are not a requirement, but a luxury… especially for daily life. Now, most Google-esque services are a requirement for daily life, but as they said, there are alternatives that you can use that work.

FutileRecipe,

That would depend on if the person were replying to meant actual/legal fraud, or just bad faith fraud. But I’m sure both happen.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • localhost
  • All magazines
  • Loading…
    Loading the web debug toolbar…
    Attempt #