Pup Biru

afaik onlyoffice has financial connections to russia, fyi

sadly many of the other relevant things these days are AI slop and ads

don’t forget the original comment though: unable to upgrade without reinstall, and glibc incompatibility

i’m not saying that changes the latter comment, but it’s certainly far from the experience for every single person every single time… windows is like macdonalds: it’s the same horrible thing every time but it’s consistent

i’m actually super surprised australia makes the cut… AND is about 10% of the USA with like 7% of the population… our power grid is fucking disgusting for carbon (although i guess we’re only just above the USA in per capita emissions too so that makes sense i suppose)

imminent collapse is a fairly common theme among anything we’ve learned to engineer fairly well… if a bridge isn’t in imminent danger of collapse under its theoretical maximum loading, it used too much material and was thus over-built which means fewer bridges for people

if an economy isn’t in imminent danger of collapse then it’s resources aren’t being used efficiently and that means fewer luxuries - and bridges - for people

it requires a very large investment to run a node, but the fact that it’s possible means it’s open by necessity, which means we can bridge to mastodon etc

this means that it will be a lot easier for people to migrate, since they don’t have to give up their entire social network

imo it’s a good jumping off point: people clearly have problems with the mastodon “on ramp” and are having no issues with bsky, so imo it’s a step in the right direction and we can’t let perfect be the enemy of better

okay yeah - not a perfect analogy… the point is that their argument is more nuanced… it’s still a strawman, but useful to understand their argument to predict their next moves

they’re trying to argue that it’s like if you’re building a deck and mess up your permits, and the government knows and then waits until you’ve spent all the time and money finishing before telling you to rip it all down

i’ve never understood why there’s not a good option for using one of the plethora of server management tools with prebuilt helpers for workstations to mimic group policy

like the tools we have on linux to handle this are far, far more powerful

which endpoint are you referring to?

there are passwords exchanged when using the vault management API, but AFAIK that’s for local access (eg CLI talking to the app)

i’m no expert on the specifics of the API; just in the description they give: https://bitwarden.com/help/what-encryption-is-used/

Bitwarden always encrypts and/or hashes your data on your local device before anything is sent to cloud servers for storage. Bitwarden servers are only used for storing encrypted data.

…

PBKDF2 SHA-256 is used to derive the encryption key from your master password

this is exactly the way this should be done. any deviation from this formula by a password manager with a server component should be viewed with extreme scepticism

When you login to the Vaultwarden web application it’s going to exchange your passphrase for a private key.

bitwarden is end to end encrypted: your decryption keys never leave your device, and the server certainly never sees them

you must always be able to trust your network

this would be a horrible password manager. this is also not how bitwarden works

you do still need to trust your server if you use the web interface, because any web interface can serve malicious components to exfiltrate whatever they like but native apps, assuming they’re verified appropriately, could communicate over HTTP and still not allow anyone actively monitoring your network to see any data that would be particularly useful

wow yes how was my spelling that wrong and can i blame auto correct?

I’m sure Fedora is full of binary blobs and not-so-free software

fedora is staunchly opposed to non-free software in their default distro … that spat a few weeks ago with OBS was related to that AFAIK

unsure about like signed blobs for “security” services but i imagine they’d be very limited, and optional

rather than sticking a white label on Fedora and call it something else

but for what benefit? no matter what’s trying to be achieved, starting with a very full-featured, robust OS that’s widely used is going to serve you very well… not just technically (less work for the same outcome), but for human reasons

there are loads of guides out there for how to fix fedora issues, few for guix… loads of RPMs that are compatible with fedora, and i can only imagine fewer packages for guix

and then if you’re talking about server OSes - and actually workstations too - managing them with tools like ansible etc… fedora is going to have off the shelf solutions

just Fedora with different theme

well, the actual software and configuration i’d argue aren’t the important part - owning the infrastructure is the important part… package mirrors, distribution methods (eg a website), being able to veto or replace certain packages, and the branding (or regulation) that draws people to it… being able to roll out a security patch to every installation without a 3rd party okaying it, for example

i’d say if it happens it should start with focusing on:

• government and workstation (this is important first to have control and independence over so that government isn’t beholden to the whims of foreign companies)
• then server (maybe - idk really if that’s worth it though; it’s a whole can of compatibility worms and adoption expense)
• then user desktop

though there is the argument that workstation and user desktop are close enough to each other that user desktop should be above server, but i’d imagine it’d be more of a “home user” than gamer situation. i could imagine some regulations around refurbishing old tech with this kind of OS too, and this would be more about low spec machines (that’d help workstations too)

alternative POV: it’s entirely FOSS so there’s little control that can be exerted from its use. it’s also entirely free, so use is extracting value without providing anything in return. by its use, you’re taking resources to maintain, host, etc and providing nothing in return

similar reason to why i don’t use ecosia with an ad blocker: by blocking ads you’re using their resources without giving back and thus you’re taking resources away from the charity

alternatively, i’ve found the bulmer peak concept to be entirely real: a drink sometimes helps you to just do rather than spending too much time thinking about if what you’re doing is best… it can help with decision paralysis on the micro scale

that said, you can train yourself out of decision paralysis and as someone gets more experienced this is likely to be less and less helpful

i don’t disagree, but i’d say that humans are, and will be responsible regardless of the system used

we’re living in the most peaceful time ever, with the highest quality of life… i’m not saying that fully socialist systems wouldn’t produce that, but i am saying compared with most of human history, things really aren’t that bad, and i’m not sure that it’s worth paying in human lives for a radical (and i’m using that world to mean big; not bad) change because the outcome is uncertain

Theoretically and practically. We have evidence for this throughout the last 130 years.

it sure is great that the USSR treated ukraine with respect aye… that holodomor sure is a lark

revolution remains the sole path to end the bloodshed

we are living in the most peaceful time in human history… a world with humans just isn’t going to be a utopia - we aren’t that good

Cuba today has much better LGBTQ rights than anywhere else in the world

but you’ve pulled 1 example out of many, many counter examples

Corporate bullshit and stock markets and whatnot are magnified in impact and scale in Capitalist systems

and authoritarian tendencies are magnified in impact and scale in socialist systems because they are by definition centralised - that’s not to say it’s inevitable, just that anyone living under these systems needs to be hyper aware of those issues and respond accordingly

nothing is perfect

As for “trying to keep things small,” that’s been tried. Trust busting was attempted, protectionism has been attempted, but regardless of will, material processes continue.

i think the closest we have to that is the EU with things like the DMA which is making a dent… with strong regulatory authority that’s resistant to capture, it’s not impossible to regulate these things… the same is true of socialism: you need strong regulatory authorities that are resistant to capture to stop people from abusing the system for the own personal interests

As for Socialism being a necessity, it’s true. It will have various forms, but eventually as production gains in complexity it necessitates public ownership and planning to continue to be efficient.

i think perhaps we should define what we actually mean - i think socialism is necessary in some part to tackle the issues we face (healthcare, housing, something akin to UBI, etc)

but i think no single system is going to be the silver bullet to all our problems: it’s going to take a long and sustained effort over many generations to figure out the right mix of all the systems we have, and it’s absolutely not going to happen in a big bang

theoretically

and now you’re arguing for massive bloodshed and forcing people to live the way you want, in potentially awful living conditions for a lot of people (i certainly, as an LGBT person, would not want to live in any previous or current socialist state) for a long time for theoretical improvement