No, we need the protocol to always display those annoying popup adware porn ads in the corner with tiny "x" buttons that exponentially increase the number of porn ads on click.
Instead of Manjaro, if the goal is to use an Arch Linux based distros, EndeavourOS is a good option. It us popular, more user friendly then arch, sticks pretty close to Arch main, the community seems friendly, and offers ways to customize your software install on first-boot
The difference between FOSS and proprietary (to me) is the motive. FOSS projects are often created out of a genuine need/want to solve a problem. Proprietary may also be trying to solve a problem (we can't through all of them under the bus because we live in a capitalist system which limits our options, we need to survive before thrive). I still find that proprietary often is just created for profit, and as profit motivated software it has an incompatible goal to actually fixing the problem.
A good (profitable) proprietary app won't fix any problem, but instead exacerbate it to maintain the reason for its continued existence, all while eliminating competition.
Firefox isn't FOSS. It requires proprietary APIs like Google Safe browsing and others. See the Fennec's deblobbing scripts and build repo for a more details: https://gitlab.com/relan/fennecbuild
I think the point isn't that the scrapper is NOT going to record their messages, but instead that it WILL regardless. Then making use of a training data unmasking exploit, the company (theoretical if the law sides with the individual) needs to fully retrain their model to remove the message text. This puts a lot if faith in copyright law, which is strong in the USA (and others) but rarely enforced to the benefit of small creators. Very little legal precedent.
Anti-fingerprinting isn't as simple as blocking JavaScript. There are dozens of other parameters. You can fingerprint with pure CSS. When I say anti-fingerprinting is necessary for a crowd, I am referring to data normalization. Like Firefox's Resistant Fingerprinting and letterboxing. I find most of RFP's effects unobtrusive, but it always for a crowd to form in specialized cases. Only Tor browser and Mullvad can reasonably form a crowd.
I dont know what you mean by privacy projects spreading dirty JS. I recommend you read up on actual anti-fingerprinting techniques. Your knowledge of anti/fingerprinting seems limited. Basic anti-fingerprinting is necessary on the modern web, same thing with a content blocker. Security and privacy sometimes come at the cost of convenience, but not always.
It injects JavaScript and CSS. Any modifications to the webpage DOM are easily fingerprintable and therefore making it easy to distinguish you from other Tor users.
Visit CreepJS ( https://abrahamjuliot.github.io/creepjs/ ) and calculate your fuzzy fingerprint. Copy-paste that somewhere for later. This step is important so you can verify afterwords that your fingerprint stayed the same (the fingerprint of all other Tor browser users on your release version).
Look at the list of public RedLib instances and find ones that are dark mode by default. Then create a config in Redirector to redirect links when you visit reddit.com
Visit creepJS and verify that your fingerprint is the same.
If it isn't too bothersome, I recommend not install any extension because there may be some way to distinguish you even if your reported fingerprint doesn't change on creepJS.
I read your source and am not convinced. While I do agree that piling on modifications is often fruitless and counterintuitive, Vanadium doesn't have the Fingerprinting protection necessary to create a crowd. At best it can create many islands of crowd for each physical device graphene supports, for each version of the software installed, and only assuming all other method of fingerprinting don't work (for some reason theoretically for the sake of this best case scenario). Read cromite's patch list to see some of the changes needed to produce basic anti-fingerprinting (still not good enough to create a crowd).
Lemongrab @ Lemongrab @lemmy.one Posts 18Comments 890Joined 2 yr. ago
No, we need the protocol to always display those annoying popup adware porn ads in the corner with tiny "x" buttons that exponentially increase the number of porn ads on click.