“I’m afraid that’s not a choice…”

If you need to provide tools that cross security boundaries then […] a small web app is better [than sudo].

A web app? Effin really!!? 🤨

Thanks.

It is one of the most private implementations of AI that I’ve seen though.

Based on what information/criteria?

Usually people use Hugo.

But I would be very interested in a less contrived alternative.

Thanks for doing this.

This is the way. And I might add, Unix desktop. Let’s not start bikeshedding between FOSS Unix distributions out of dogmatic reasons (I’m sure you didn’t mean to specifically single out “Linux” here, but I wish we would stop opposing “Linux” and other Unixes like BSD, Illumos, etc).

The point is, voting with your data for software that is defending your interests, and respecting your rights.

Edit: Dang, I didn’t expect to get so much slack for “Unix as opposed to Unix-Like”. I absolutely meant “Unix-Like”, but my point is that it shouldn’t matter. Most software is trying to be compatible, these days, and Linux isn’t (in spite of all that marketing material) an OS. It is a kernel. So semantics for semantics, can it even be compared to something it is not? I merely tried to be inclusive.

With a 52% percent mortality rate, this might well be the last such opportunity. One way or another. 😬

Damn, now I want part 2!! 😶

(Thanks for posting!! 🙏)

But use the widows version and the proton layer. The Linux version is horribly coded.

I would not call that a “privacy proxy”, it is very disingenuous. It is a normal proxy, which replaces the technical metadata from your connection, so that automated tracking is harder. But it will not replace or remove any of your input. And you can easily be tracked that way too.

Yeah, I find the puzzle sliding JavaScript captchas the best as a user. Cognitively better than “training neural networks to recognise protestors”, and still fast enough that it doesn’t feel like a forced ad. Reliability might however vary a lot between implementations.

Plus, that way, you have a trail of invites. If something goes wrong, you can prune entire branches and mitigate most abuse.

And Docker initially used Ubuntu. They explicitly and specifically switched to Alpine in 2016 for performance, to minimise the overhead.

Note: this comment is long, because it is important and the idea that “systemd is always better, no matter the situation” is absolutely dangerous for the entire FOSS ecosystem: both diversity and rationality are essential.

Systemd can get more efficient than running hundreds of poorly integrated scripts

In theory yes. In practice, systemd is a huge monolithic single-point-of-failure system, with several bottlenecks and reinventing-the-wheel galore. And openrc is a far cry from “hundreds of poorly integrated scripts”.

I think it is crucial we stop having dogmatic “arguments” with argumentum ad populum or arguments of authority, or we will end up recreating a Microsoft-like environment in free software.

Let’s stop trying to shoehorn popular solutions into ill suited use cases, just because they are used elsewhere with different limitations.

Systemd might make sense for most people on desktop targets (CPUs with several cores, and several GB of RAM), because convenience and comfort (which systemd excels at, let’s be honest) but as we approach “embedded” targets, simpler and smaller is always better.

And no matter how much optimisation you cram into the bigger software, it will just not perform like the simpler software, especially with limited resources.

Now, I take OpenRC as an example here, because it is AFAIR the default in devuan, but it also supports runit, sinit, s6 and shepherd.

And using s6, you just can’t say “systemd is flat out better in all cases”, that would be simply stupid.

Devuan + xfce.

https://simplex.chat/blog/20240314-simplex-chat-v5-6-quantum-resistance-signal-double-ratchet-algorithm.html

¹ Repudiation in SimpleX Chat will include client-server protocol from v5.7 or v5.8. Currently it is implemented but not enabled yet, as its support requires releasing the relay protocol that breaks backward compatibility.

² Post-quantum cryptography is available in beta version, as opt-in only for direct conversations. See below how it will be rolled-out further.

Some columns are marked with a yellow checkmark:

• when messages are padded, but not to a fixed size.
• when repudiation does not include client-server connection. In case of Cwtch it appears that the presence of cryptographic signatures compromises repudiation (deniability), but it needs to be clarified.
• when 2-factor key exchange is optional (via security code verification).
• when post-quantum cryptography is only added to the initial key agreement and does not protect break-in recovery.

Larger might be acceptable too, not sure

It should.

Also, work off of the copy. Never touch the source.

But hopefully I can delay and minimise it a bit, open a better channel of communication with a few friends and relatives and perhaps raise some awareness in the process.

Absolutely.

This isn’t about you. Your data is key in making other, relevant people stand out. Why relevant? Because they resist. Because they aren’t depressed, they are fighting back. And whatever the reason that drives them, they can be manipulated. By compromising their anonymity. By making literally everyone else a “known variable”. With your help.