splendoruranium @ splendoruranium @infosec.pub

Posts

1

Comments

134

Joined

2 yr. ago

what? no! licenses are how authors are deciding to grant specific permissions on their copyright.

Sure. But that does not contradict what I wrote.

that is like saying because you found a book in a library you have the choice to copy it and sell it.

That is precisely the choice one has. It's a choice one doesn't have when one doesn't know the contents of the book or when they are confronted with closed-source software.

the fact that source is available does not grant any permission besides looking at it.

Yes I agree. "Making the choice" would require making it without the author's permission.
But again, I'm not talking about permissions as I don't really consider them to be nearly as important as availability and ability. One has the ability to modify/use code with the source and without permission one does not have the ability to modify/use code without the source and with permission.

So yes, Libre is nice, but the source-open aspect is always the most important component.

Most important to me: Which of them is easier to self-host?

I've been running a Mumble server for my friends for over a decade now and I'd like... something more without having to get too technical. Mumble is literally just a single apt-get and you're basically done, so that's about the level of technical expertise that I bring to the table. I've tentatively looked into other solutions over the years but I always feel my attention drifting when the setup-tutorial covers multiple pages and starts with manually configuring some database or certificate authority or whatever. Sorry, I didn't mean for this to get too ranty.

I’m getting brain damage from this thread. So many stupid people here.

2010 called, it wants its vaguebooking back 😜

But in all seriousness, if you have grievances or consider any particular piece of information that you stumble upon to be incorrect then you need to either point that out specifically or refrain from commenting - otherwise you're actively confusing and deteriorating a conversation, that's not good.

The source code from windows have been leaked a few times already. Try repackaging it or redistributing with modifications, see how far it will go before you get sued into oblivion.

I'm not really sure what you mean here, it has been modified and redistributed vigorously ever since its leak.

"Suing a random internet person on the other side of the world" is rarely a successful proposition. In order for that to work there would have to be incentive, jurisdiction and a lack of anonymity :P

I personally nerver really understood the whole semantics debate that always unfolds in situations like this. What does it matter if a piece of software is truly libre or how it is licensed as long as the source code is available? Respecting a license is a choice. If you have the code you can fork it. Whether it's libre or not only influences your ability to put your real name under the fork, doesn't it?

I don't, at least I'm not making an active effort. Why would I? I already have enough music to generate playlists that could last for years. That's more than enough music.
Apart from that there's the usual cultural osmosis that can't be avoided. A song that is used in a movie, plays on a radio/car stereo or at an event somewhere and you like it. Bam, discovery!

Legitimate interest is their interest, not yours.

The interest might be theirs but the "legitimate" part absolutely has to incorporate a written justification somewhere within the the depths of the mandated records of processing activities that explains why the business/institution couldn't possibly do what they're doing without processing that particular piece of user data. "I want that" is not legitimate interest in the sense of Article 6.

It absolutely is, at least from my observations!

Speak for yourself. I just want to own the content I buy. And I'll happily buy it from my seedbox provider if streaming services won't sell it to me.

Considering the name of this community I feel like it is safe to assume that folk around here do care about cookies. An extension that randomly consents to tracking is the opposite of a solution.

I don’t know how it works for this particular Cyberpunk crack.

Why would there need to be a crack in the first place? Cyberpunk is released DRM-free, isn't it?

That's an impressive project indeed.

And here all I can cynically think is "Great, finally a way to make the FP4 a bit more unwieldy and hard to hold with small hands, that had always been way too easy before!"

I am not sure if it will work out like this though. The amount of ads they are forcing down peoples throat is isane. Eventually it will make people consume less videos and with that less ads overall.

Sure, could be - but keep in mind that they have all the relevant usage data at hand. Any decrease in service popularity among users (or indeed any kind of user behavior) is immediately visible to them. They have the means to know exactly what annoyances the market will bear.

And considering that YouTube still holds a de-facto monopoly on video discoverability within the entire anglophone internet I feel like it's safe to say that the market will likely bear a lot more annoyances :P

I found out Thangs locks print files and comments behind an account when I tried downloading my own files from a different device. I’ve decided to leave the platform and going back to my trusty old Thingiverse. I tried to find something new and better but maybe Thingiverse is just the place to be for now. New links below.

v.2: https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:6193644

v.3: https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:6193659

What's the point of "leaving" or not using a platform like Thingiverse? Surely using Thingiverse and Thangs (and any other conceivable source) is objectively better than... just using a single platform, isn't it?!

This is such a better use of their time and dollars versus improving their service to make it more attractive to customers.

Making their service more attractive to customers is precicesly what they're trying to do.

It's just that an advertising agency's customers are not the folk who watch, read or hear the ads, it's the folk who pay for the ads.

Thanks for humoring me!

Well, the info promotes options people can do to fight climate change. It says less children is the best option. Right now eco-activists blame and attack people for using cars and planes, they promote laws to restrict this kind of things. In few years they will blame attack mothers with 2 children and promote birth restrictions laws.

How many children to have - is a personal decision made considering many different reasons. What I find not acceptable is - promoting/advertising/pushing people to have less children because to protect climate. Like: “you have a 2 children? You are a shitty person killing our planet - much worse then a guy flying private jet!”

I always find it helpful to try and decouple everything from value judgements as best as possible - in that regard I find it hard to read any kind of "blame" or accusations of "being a shitty person" into that graphic. I mean, it's just a fancy spreadsheet, isn't it? "This kind of choice entails that kind of impact".

Assuming that the data and the estimates themselves are reasonable and correct then it wouldn't seem too far-fetched to accept that avoiding a transatlantic flight is a more impactful decision for one's carbon footprint than life-long dutiful recycling. I mean at that point it's just comparing numbers and it would seem to be rather objective and judgement-free to say "A person choosing to live their life without a car has made a bigger impact on their carbon footprint with that decision than than a person choosing to replace that car with a hybrid" or, conversely, "A person choosing to live their life with one fewer children has made a bigger impact on their carbon footprint with that decision than a person choosing to recycle" - wouldn't it?

Or let's do it the other way around: What would you change about that graphic to make it more acceptable in your eyes? Would you just leave out the last column or do something completely different with the data?

Agree. But promoting/pushing childfree as a responsible answer for a climat issue as the next option after carefree does not make sense either for the same reason.

I'm not sure I follow - are you saying that you would consider a family with two children to have made a less acceptable/responsible decision than a family with three children (or zero/one, one/two, ... etc.)?
I mean if so then I certainly don't want you to feel uncomfortable talking about it, it's just that I've never encountered that kind of outlook before, so it's a bit of an unexpected turn in the conversation for me. Could you elaborate on what you mean?

Why they stopped on “one less child”? I’m pretty sure that a suicide is the best thing a person can do to fight against climate change.

Advice doesn't make much sense within some kind of shared ethics framework, otherwise you just end up with a reward function for some kind of rampaging AI.
That's likely why this collection of personal choices doesn't list "kill yourself" or "kill others" - because it doesn't consider them to be acceptable personal choices. And surely neither do you.

Blacklist everything then whitelist the IPs you know you’ll be connecting from (work, cell phone, etc). I don’t connect from random places usually. If I need to then I use cellular. You might be better off with a VPN if you need to connect from random places.

I see, thanks!
Is there any concern with whitelisting a cellular CGNAT's public IP? Presumably that would potentially whitelist thousands or tens of thousands of other mobile devices at once, wouldn't it?