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.

Just plant the tree on the neighbours property ;)

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 might sadly be true.

Now this is getting ridiculous.

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.

And you are not getting the point. Every method of killing people is terrible and inhumane. There is no humane way of killing people, because the very act of killing people is inhumane.

The only humane method is one that doesn’t kill or harm people.

A Fairphone 4. Got it at launch and it’s a terribly buggy mess.

Describing all the issues would make a huge wall of text.

The sad part is that the hardware is ok. But they don’t seem to have any software QA at all.

My goal was to carry it until 2027, when replacable batteries will become standard, but since I can’t even use the phone for calling, I am trying to at least carry it until the Galaxy S55 launches.

You seem to have no arguments for your opinion, otherwise why would you have to resort to personal attacks?

These kinds of comments are usually the internet equivalent of a white flag.

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.

• You don’t like ActivityPub, you want a new protocol
• The system should make it easy to create new, small instances
• The instances should share sessions with the other instances (=single sign on) based on trusting them
• You prefer a centralized system?
• You want the system to not use a single protocol (ActivityPub), but use multiple protocols?
• ActivityPub based services have bad UX due to the complexity of the protocol

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.

Murder is still murder, no matter if it’s legalized.

And an execution is a premeditated murder in cold blood, even a systemic one. It’s pretty much the worst kind of murder.

And yes, every kind of murder is problematic. Using gas chambers just gives it the correct appearance: state sponsored serial murder.

So, a gas chamber? Back to 1938, are we?

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.

• Protocols are what computers use to communicate with each other. No protocols means no interaction between different computers/servers. Without protocols, none of the things you ask for can be possible.
• Federated services don’t have single sign on. On the contrary, single sign on is a centralized service not a distributed one. To clarify that: I cannot log into lemmy.world with my feddit.de accout, same as I cannot log into hotmail with my gmail account. In both cases I log into my instance/provider and this allows me to communicate with people on other instances/providers. Federation is the process of sharing content between instances. SSO on the other hand is a centralized service that then communicates with other services to let you log into these other services. For example, I can log into my Google account and then use this to login to other sites. This only works because people trust Google. This would not work as a decentralized service with untrusted servers.
• Duplication is used on federated services for a few reasons. First, it’s a kind of caching mechanism distributing the load. If someone posts something on one instance, it’s transferred only once to the other instances which then serve it to all their users. Without duplication, each individual view would have to be requested again from the original instance. The other advantage is that the admins of all the instances retain control over the content. If the other instance goes offline, users can still see “their” copy of the content. And if the other instance doesn’t moderate their content, the mods/admins of your instance can do that themselves.

So as you see, these concepts aren’t there just for fun, but for a purpose.