A better Revanced
patatahooligan @ patatahooligan @lemmy.world Posts 1Comments 224Joined 2 yr. ago
patatahooligan @ patatahooligan @lemmy.world
Posts
1
Comments
224
Joined
2 yr. ago
prageru is a known disinformation platform. That link is worthless.
The ongoing war in Gaza, is HAMAS against Israel.
And what about the Palestinian lands that are occupied and the Palestinians that were uprooted from there? What about the Palestinians that have been killed by Israel? The recent events might have been HAMAS, but historically this is a Palestine-Israel conflict. If you can't be bothered to learn and understand the context, why comment at all?
I hate partitions. Moving and resizing partitions is not fun if you don't correctly predict exactly the amount of space you need. If you really want the modularity, use btrfs subvolumes instead. IMPORTANT: While it is definitely feasible, ability to retain subvolumes might depend on the distro installer! Check before you commit to this approach!
Also, consider using LVM or multi-device btrfs to make the drives act as one filesystem. This means that you will never have to worry about where to place your files to balance the load, but it might make removing/replacing a drive in the future harder.
No they are official arch linux packages. There are no flatpak or snap packages on this system. The only AUR packages that could influence appearance on this system are the adwaita-qt* packages, but these should have no effect at all on gnome apps.
If this is not a known issue, I guess I might have outdated options in config files or the dconf database. I'll do a cleanup and see if it fixes it.
I haven't used gnome in a while and decided to check it out again. I noticed that even though I've set the theme to dark apps like nautilus and gnome-control-center are always light-themed. Is that their intended behavior? If not, any ideas on what's wrong?
Assuming that the account mentioned in the linked dev update post is the one that commented underneath it
To be clear, this is the part I'm asking about.
I see. So do we have any evidence at all that this is even the same person?
If you go to the profile, the handle is @CannotSleep420. Why is it different to the username? I didn't even know that's a thing.
I don't know of anything about nvidia being "way behind", apart from wayland support. The only case I can think of the top of my head where the bad wayland support comes into play is if you have multiple monitors with different refresh rates. But maybe even that is not an issue anymore with new nvidia drivers. Maybe others can comment on it as I no longer have an nvidia card to check.
Use protondb to check whether your games play well on proton. It shows each commenter's system specs as well, so you can see if a game has issues on nvidia specifically.
One warning: don't try to install software, including the nvidia driver, as you would on windows. On linux, you don't go and download it from nvidia's website, you get it from your distro's package repositories, and you let it get updated automatically via your system updates. Depending on the distro you install, it might be as easy as checking a tickbox to automatically install "Additional drivers" or "Proprietary drivers" during installation.
EDIT: I assumed "way behind" to mean that nvidia is behind amd on linux. If you meant how much linux gaming is behind in general, that's another story. Linux does tend to lag behind in implementing newer features like newer DLSS versions. If you're worried about this, then perhaps you will get more information if you post a question about what specifically you care about.
But HTTPS will stop them from seeing the content you actually see on the web.
Sure, but that was true for your ISP as well. I'm not questioning what data you're leaking. I'm saying that it's the same data and you only change who you leak it to if you choose to use a VPN.
It seems like you've thought about it and you have made an informed choice. That's great and I don't have anything to argue against here. The only reason I commented is that there seems to be a trend of "just use VPN and your data is protected" mentality, especially with all the ads in gaming/tech related content. There was no way for me to know if you or the other users who would read your initial comment were aware that using a VPN doesn't magically protect your data if you don't know who your provider is, so I though I'd point it out.
Thanks for the explanation. I don't really know how flash storage works. The fundamental idea of the problem I described would still apply, though as long as the input block size for dd extends to more than one page of the underlying storage.
For example, say that exactly three pages fit in a block. If dd attempts to read pages A, B and C (ABC) and fails to read B, you would want the corresponding part zeroed in the output to preserve the offsets of all the other pages (A0C). But instead dd reads whatever it can for the entire block, then pads the rest of the block size with zeroes, effectively moving C forward (AC0). So essentially you magnify errors.
Thanks for the input, guys. I consider my issue resolved.
As for the specific question I head, dd can fill with zeroes the blocks that failed to read with conv=noerror,sync. However, this puts the zeroes at the end of the block and not over the exact bit/byte that failed to read, meaning that a read error will invalidate the rest of the block.
But the consensus across source I searched seems to be to use ddrescue instead of dd.
I already have done an rsync copy. I noticed that some files failed to transfer and I thought that maybe the drive is failing. Wanting to attempt to debug and possibly rescue some more data (eg parts of big files that failed to transfer completely) without messing with the original copy, I tried dd and that's how we got here.
Also this was a Windows system that was used daily by a family member and has a lot of installed background/tray services with saved logins. I imagine I could figure out everything there is to keep in an rsync clone, but it might be easier to have an image that I can try to mount to a VM and inspect "internally".
So I don't need the clone strictly speaking but it would be nice to have. Plus, I would like to know the answer for the future as well.
Using a VPN just hands all of this information to them instead. That could be an improvement, but how do you know?
They could make new updates to lemmy proprietary
Maybe not even that. Lemmy is released under the AGPL3. This means that modified versions of Lemmy have to also be released as free software under the AGPL3 or a compatible license. To release a derivative work under an incompatible license you would need to own the code or be given permission by each contributor to do so. For any contribution where you can't make a deal with the author, you would have to rip it out of the codebase entirely. Note that this is true for lemmy devs as well. If there is no Contributor License Agreement that states otherwise, they cannot distribute the work of other contributors under an AGPL3-incompatible license.
Well, Valve is privately-owned company and it's investing a lot of money into the free software ecosystem right now. Yes it's capitalism but very different in principles to the rest of the market.
Wow. Moving the windows that don't fit in the current workspace to a new one is such a simple idea that might turn out to be incredibly effective. I love that Gnome exists to challenge the established design patterns and try to replace them, even though I'm not actively using it.
With this and neovide intergration I'll probably switch to helix.
Personally I don't care so much about the things that Linux does better but rather the abusive things it doesn't do. No ads, surveillance, forced updates etc. And it's not that linux happens to not do that stuff. It's that the decentralized nature of free software acts as a preventative measure against those malicious practices. On the other side, your best interests always conflict with those of a multi-billion company, practically guaranteeing that the software doesn't behave as you. So windows are as unlikely to become better in this regard as linux is to become worse.
Also the ability to build things from the ground up. If you want to customize windows you're always trying to replace or override or remove stuff. Good luck figuring out if you have left something in the background adding overhead at best and conflicting with what you actually want to use at worst. This isn't just some hypothetical. For example I've had windows make an HDD-era PC completely unusable because a background telemetry process would 100% the C: drive. It was a nightmarish experience to debug and fix this because even opening the task manager wouldn't work most of the time.
Having gotten the important stuff out of the way, I will add that even for stuff that you technically can do on both platforms, it is worth considering if they are equally likely to foster thriving communities. Sure I can replace the windows shell, but am I really given options of the same quality and longevity as the most popular linux shells? When a proprietary windows component takes an ugly turn is it as likely that someone will develop an alternative if it means they have to build it from the ground up, compared to the linux world where you would start by forking an existing project, eg how people who didn't like gnome 3 forked gnome 2? The situation is nuanced and answers like "there exists a way to do X on Y" or "it is technically possible for someone to solve this" don't fully cover it.
I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I'm not saying wayland magically makes everything secure. I'm saying that wayland allows secure solutions. Let's put it simply
- Wayland "ignores" all the issues if that's what you want to call it
- Xorg breaks attempts to solve these issues, which is much worse than "ignoring" them
You mentioned apps having full access to my home directory. Apps don't have access to my home directory if I run them in a sandbox. But using a sandbox to protect my SSH keys or firefox session cookies is pointless if the sandboxed app can just grab my login details as I type them and do the same or more harm as they would if they had the contents of my home directory. Using a sandbox is only beneficial on Wayland. You could potentially use nested Xorg sessions for everything but that's more overhead, will introduce all the same problems as Wayland (screen capture/global shortcuts/etc), while also having none of the Wayland benefits.
And given how garbage the modern state of sandboxing still is
I'm not talking about "the current state" or any particular tool. One protocol supports sandboxing cleanly and the other doesn't. You might have noticed that display server protocols are hard to replace so they should support what we want, not only what we have right now. If you don't see a difference between not having a good way to do something right now versus not allowing for the possibility to do something in a good way ever, let's just end the discussion here. If those are the same to you no argument or explanation matters.
If you actual want to solve this issue you have to provide secure means to do all those task.
Yes that exactly the point. Proposed protocols for these features allow a secure implementation to be configured. You would have a DE that asks you for every single permission an app requests. You don't automatically get a secure implementation, but it is possible. There might be issues with the wayland protocol development processes or lack of interest/manpower by DE/WM developers, or many other things that lead to subpar or missing solutions to current issues, but they are not inherent and unsolvable issues of the protocol.
You can argue that "open source" can mean other things that what the OSI defined it to mean, but the truth of the matter is that almost everyone thinks of the OSI or similar definition when they talk about "open source". Insisting on using the term this way is deliberately misleading. Even your own links don't support your argument.
A bit further down in the Wikipedia page is this:
And if you go to the main article, it is apparent that the OSI definition is treated as the de fact definition of open source. I'm not going to quote everything, but here are examples of this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software#Definitions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software#Open-source_versus_source-available
And from Red Hat, literally the first sentence
And if we follow that link:
But the Red Hat page is a bad source anyway because it is written like a short intro and not a formal definition of the concept. Taking a random sentence from it and arguing that it doesn't mention distribution makes no sense.
Here is a more comprehensive page from Red Hat, that clearly states that they evaluate whether a license is open source based on OSI and the FSF definitions.