hEy, yOu lEaRnEd A bUzZwOrD aNd rEcEnTlY dIsCoVeReD tHe sHiFt KeY!!! cOnGrAtS!?!
hEy, yOu lEaRnEd A bUzZwOrD aNd rEcEnTlY dIsCoVeReD tHe sHiFt KeY!!! cOnGrAtS!?!
hEy, yOu lEaRnEd A bUzZwOrD aNd rEcEnTlY dIsCoVeReD tHe sHiFt KeY!!! cOnGrAtS!?!
But this issue wasn’t found because of code analysis per se, but because of microbenchmarking.
Oh, we play dumb ad-hominem without any basis in reality?
I can play this too: Was your last school homework hard?
If the vulnerability is in the wild, what other security mechanisms do you have until it’s patched?
The only real downside on the open source side is that the fix is also public, and thus the recipe how to exploit the backdoor.
If there’s a massive CVE on a closed source system, you get a super high-level description of the issue and that’s it.
If there’s one on an open source system, you get ready-made “proof of concepts” on github that any script kiddy can exploit.
And since not every software can be updated instantly, you are left with millions of vulnerable servers/PCs and a lot of happy script kiddies.
See, for example, Log4Shell.
Most people I helped getting Linux to work are actually not techy at all and they haven’t touched the CLI at all so far…
I guess it differs if you use Linux because you are interested in the technology or if you use it because Windows 11 doesn’t run on your PC.
Tbh, I don’t recommend beginners to try out multiple distros in the beginning. Realistically, if you don’t have in depth Linux knowledge already, all you’ll be able to differentiate is the look of the DE and the wallpaper.
I find, too much choice tends to confuse beginners more than it helps them.
So I’d rather recommend something simple like Ubuntu and let them try out the flavours with the different DEs.
Choice is better for later when people actually understand what they are looking for.
That happens if you don’t have an actual legal team… I am sure they are doing their best, but if you don’t have a lawyer, you can’t do legal texts.
Sorry, no condescension intended.
Your post read like one written by someone with very minimal knowledge about the subject, which might have been a misunderstanding on my part. So I tried to cover the basics before talking about the rest.
There is really no shame in asking questions about something where you don’t have experience. There are far more topics I have no idea about than there are topics where I do have a deep understanding.
So to get on the same page, I’ll summarize what I understood, please correct me if you mean something different.
Is this correct?
We have a few contradictions here.
You cannot have a system where anyone can easily create servers and at the same time have shared sessions based on trust. These two requirements conflict with each other.
Either servers only work with servers they trust, and then you can’t just create a new small server and interact with the network.
Or anyone can easily create a new small server, but then you can’t do anything based on trust, since you never know if that server was created with malicious intent.
Regarding centralized/decentralized you have to differentiate between implementation and management.
All major social networks run distributed systems. If you want to serve billions of users, you need to run millions of servers. These servers are distributed around the globe to give fast access to users everywhere. Chances are pretty high that your ISP has a few racks of Facebook, Netflix, YouTube and Tiktok servers.
Their distributed system is orders of magnitude more complex than everything running ActivityPub combined.
But their system works, because they have tens of thousands of highly paid specialists to make them work.
ActivityPub based services on the other hand have almost no funding and manpower.
Mastodon is the best in this respect. They have 6 people who are actually working on the system.
Lemmy has two developers who earn close to minimum wages.
Kbin has a single guy developing it.
That’s the real reason why the UX is crap.
If anything, ActivityPub and the services running on them are extremely underengineered and underdeveloped.
Btw, there is something rather close to what you seem to want: online forums with Google single sign on.
The forums are not interacting at all with other forums. No federation or anything at all. There are enough commercial solutions that work really well. And with Google Single Sign On you also don’t have to register for each forum.
E-mail. E-mail does support small servers.
Btw, I think you are mixing up a few topics here, so let’s see what you actually want.
So as you see, these concepts aren’t there just for fun, but for a purpose.
There are two issues with that:
Lemmy, or even ActivityPub are designed to be non-GDPR compliant. (Probably not on purpose, but the way it works makes it basically impossible to be GDPR compliant.)
That already exists. The person who created a post or comment can delete it. But it only works sometimes, since federation is constantly not working correctly.
That’s true, but neither the article nor the discussion are about ActivityPub.
Both are specifically about Lemmy, and Lemmy does have private messages.
I said: Code changes are easy, all the other things in regards to supporting playing on Linux (anticheat, support requests, testing, …) is hard.
You said: But code changes are easy because steam has libraries to unify distribution.
Do you see the problem here?
What are you going to tell me next? That code changes are easy?
And the content of private messages.
How about private messages which are also unencrypted?
It’s actually not wrong if you look at it in another way.
So there are very real risks attached to a hobbyist-run service with no legal accountability and no transparency at all.
We all know the downsides of Big Tech though, so it’s everyone’s personal choice to figure out which disadvantages hurt them personally more.
Emails also go to other’s servers.
But you could just host an IRC server.
hEy, yOu lEaRnEd A bUzZwOrD aNd rEcEnTlY dIsCoVeReD tHe sHiFt KeY!!! cOnGrAtS!?!