I don’t see how spreading FUD and being misinformed are exclusive. I didn’t say he was doing so in bad faith, just stating that the comment created fear, uncertainty and doubt without any factual basis.
To be fair Wikipedia does say it is a manipulative propaganda tactic but I’ve usually meant it in the abovementioned context.
I don’t doubt that in the future Google will kill off the AOSP and disable installing custom ROMs like Apple does. But it just isn’t accurate to say that in 200 days sideloading on GOS won’t work or that Google disabling sideloading on their ROM even affects GOS in any way.
TL;DR The above commenter is spreading FUD. GOS will work fine and allow sideloading.
Stop spreading FUD. Google kills sideloading on Google certified ROMs. Being Google certified doesn’t mean you have more features than ROMs which aren’t certified. Only Google certified ROMs lose the ability to sideload and have to adhere to all Google Play policies. Meaning GOS loses its certified status but doesn’t lose the ability to sideload. The only way in which GOS might be coerced to disable sideloading is if Google pushes these changes upstream to the AOSP and even then forking is always an option. Also when has Google ever hinted at disabling flashing custom ROMs? It might be right down their alley but I wouldn’t make such claims without citing sources.
Just as a side note: Android ≠ AOSP. This is relevant as many people misunderstand the news they read. When Google changes Android (Google’s proprietary AOSP “distro”) it doesn’t necessarily mean that changes are coming to the AOSP or GOS which is also an AOSP “distro”.
Reading through this forum thread is recommended.
I’d really love to see some Blink based browser comparisons, especially Trivalent (which is supposed to be compareble to Vanadium).
Made me chuckle. Truly a comment-of-the-month material.
Maybe Peergos?
Unlike most other messengers, Delta Chat apps do not store any metadata about contacts or groups on servers, also not in encrypted form. Instead, all group metadata is end-to-end encrypted and stored on end-user devices, only. Servers can therefore only see:
- the sender and receiver addresses and
- the message size.
By default, the addresses are randomly generated. All other message, contact and group metadata resides in the end-to-end encrypted part of messages.
https://delta.chat/en/help#message-metadata
> Doesn’t store any metadata on servers
> Servers still see the sender and reciever and the message size
Explain how this is not contradictory.
Furthermore my original argument on protocol blocking still stands (if almost all communication platforms rely on a widely used protocol, the blocking of which is infeasble, then how is this a feature noone else besides deltachat has).
And as the FAQ brilliantly illustrates, you don’t have to block the mail protocol to inhibit deltachat users from communicating. All you have to do, is just shut down the relays which are crucial to masking your metadata.
Speaking of relays, all they do is transfer the trust. Without using relays you have to trust that normal mail servers wont’t log your activity (they do). With relays you have to trust that the relay operators won’t log your activity.
Perhaps they’ve changed, but last I checked they didn’t allow IMAP/POP3 due to “security concerns”.
Deltachat can’t be considered as private as Signal, SimpleX, Briar, Threema or Cwtch due to the fact that it’s based on the mail protocol. The mail protocol will always leak metadata (who, to whom, where and when) because it could’t function otherwise. And because we live in a world of surveillence, metadata can be oftentimes more valuable than the message itself.
Also saying that deltachat is unblockable because it is based on the mail protocol would be the same as saying that every app utilizing VOIP is unblockable because it uses the TCP/IP stack and blocking it would render the internet unusuable.
An email provider who doesn’t lock you into their ecosystem and doesn’t collaborate with law enforcement without putting up a fight.
I would advise against deleting your account. When you delete your account you also forfeit your username which can then be used to impersonate you. While I’m not sure on the exact math, it would seem logical that having a stagnant account keeps up their costs but doesn’t bring in almost anything resulting in a net loss on an account basis.
They just changed the maintainers? What in this thread does not give you confidence?
Why do NFTs make then inherently bad? AFAIK they are not trying to pivot into selling monkey pictures but rather selling prepaid phone cards to cover server costs for large communities. Why is this bad?
DISCLAIMER
I am not a computer security expert, merely a hobbyist having read some blogs from people who sounded smart. It is more than probable that I am mistaken in one or more parts of this post.
Linux is not more secure than Windows. By default, it’s actually considerably more vulnerable than Windows. Source
In my opinion an antivirus doesn’t really solve your problem. What you actually want is sandboxing, which means restricting user and program privileges. I recommend getting familiar with SELinux (or alternatively AppArmor, although it isn’t nearly as effective) and bubblewrap (or alernatively Firejail, which requires root privileges to run and is thus a bigger threat vector than bubblewrap).
Aside from that just disable any service you aren’t using (like ssh), use a deny-all-allow-some firewall, and verify what you download. If the link says “100% REAL 1 MILLION FREE ROBUX DOWNLOAD CLICK HERE NOW”, then maybe don’t click there.
Because even an antivirus won’t help you if you download malware, which isn’t compiled by skids who lifted the code from some darknet hacker forum. Antivirus isn’t some magical tool which makes your computer inherently more secure. Meaning you can’t offload your responsibilty to a program running with kernel level privileges. Your computer, your responsibilty.
P.S: If you want a more secure computer, I’d recommend a minimal and/or rolling release distro (openSUSE, Arch, Void, Debian) or FreeBSD/OpenBSD (BSD variants mitigate many of Linux’s inherent flaws).
And it has been audited by an independent auditor. And it doesn’t have user ID’s. And you can have multiple accounts with no effort. And you can selfhost your own servers. And it’s actively developed. And it’s available on all major platforms. And the list of pros goes on.
I have to contend that the founders views don’t align with my own (or with most people on lemmy). But that aside (freedom of speech), I wouldn’t dismiss them simply because “VC bad”. If you want a different perspective, read this.
I am at the very beginning of my journey taking those first baby steps. As I don’t yet understand all the sysadmin stuff, I’m treading rather carefully to avoid making unfuckable mistakes.
I recently switched to Void on my daily driver so it has been a bit of a trial to get used to a new OS and configure it correctly. Nevertheless, it’s been a great learning experience.
Alongside it I’ve downloaded OpenWrt on my router and begun to configure it as well (still need to deal with the Wireguard and Unbound config).
For the actual server I managed to secure an old Dell Optiplex. In the near future, I plan to flash it with Libreboot and then install Debian or FreeBSD (apparently great ZFS support) on it. Though I’ve still no idea whether I should use Proxmox and how I should format my drives (one 500GB SSD and 4TB HDD) for maximum effiency and for the possibility of later easily upgrading my storage capacity.
When I’ve finally past these steps, I plan to selfhost music services, as well as few other basic services. My goal at the moment is to replace Spotify for my whole family. But it’s still a long way to go.
Only a Sith deals in absolutes!