Also @shrugal@lemmy.world.
Welcome to the Linux community. :)
You will probably never understand everything about Linux and all of its included and associated systems. That’s completely fine, no one does! That’s why we are many, and it’s what asking for advice or help is for. You can just learn whatever interests you at your own pace, and know that there will always be interesting things you haven’t seen yet.
I really like the idea of creating a decentralized network that has a fair monetization model built right in, instead of relying on donations like the Fediverse. Crypto got a very bad rep, but this kind of stuff is exactly what it’s good for imo.
It also has some core features that are missing from other similar messengers, like multi-device sync. And lastly, the devs seem pretty capable and open as well. They are very transparent with their work and seem to have the right ideas about where things should go and which trade-offs to make. E.g. their reasoning for not using the Signal protocol seems solid to me.
So I’m hopeful, but time will tell if it all works out.
It’s hard to overstate what a nothing-burger this article really is! Let me break it down:
That’s it, that’s the whole story. That’s the reason why the Telegram guy of all people thinks you should be careful, and better use his chat service instead, and the Twitter guy agrees.
I mean, reproducible builds on iOS would be nice, but that platform has much bigger problems from a privacy/security/sovereignty/freedom standpoint anyway. And the rest is just nothing turned up to 11.
I think some of the arguments are quite flawed. Bitcoin itself has most of the properties it is said to have, but it lives in a world that doesn’t and so some only really apply if you manage to stay inside the system. Like, your Signal chats are private as long as you don’t copy-paste them to Facebook.
Regarding self-custody/decentralization and using custodial services: The problem here is not that those properties don’t apply to Bitcoin, but that some people just choose to give away control over their wallets or not use Bitcoin itself for certain transactions. Can’t blame that on the currency, unless you think it can’t be done any other way.
Regarding privacy: I don’t think any serious “Bitcoiner” advertises Bitcoin as private. The message has always been that it’s “pseudonymous”, that you have to take extra steps in order to make it anonymous, and that it’s transparent instead of private by design.
Regarding transparency/inclusion: These paragraphs actually argue about privacy again. One is trying to spin the existing transparency into a negative, which is a valid opinion but not something “Bitcoiners” are wrong about. The other circles back to the idea of staying inside the system. Bitcoin transactions are inclusive, but ofc you can still get into trouble if you have to fear external repercussions and can’t stay anonymous.
pay for it with
advertisingyour data
FTFY.
That part is not allowed according to the GDPR afaik, the decision about your personal data cannot be artificially linked to something else. They can absolutely show ads, but without using your data.
From what I understand the GDPR says you have to give users a real choice about the usage of their data, without any unreasonable negative repercussions. Having to pay money (at least as much as they are asking for) is such an unacceptable repercussion, no matter how FB might phrase it.
They are allowed to take money or show ads for access, but they can’t couple that decision with the one about the user’s data usage.
The video is probably factually correct, but very disingenuous with its interpretations and conclusions imo.
Of course Mozilla and Firefox have their own share of problems and bad decisions, and they are pretty well known and talked about from what I’ve seen, but equating it to Google and Chrome is just pure cynicism. Mozilla having to earn money somehow (1% donations!) and Google trying to maximize profits at all costs is not the same thing, even if it might look similar sometimes.
Clickbait headline. The underlying article lists much more reasonable restrictions:
So non-commercial transations are fine, as are crypto transactions to non-custodial wallets.
Their ebook support has become quite good as well, it’s like a gift that keeps on giving!
Being able to create issues and discuss merge requests on various source hosting sites without having to create an account on each would be a huge step forward! Especially since M$ has taken over Github and is well on its way to become the defacto centralized Git hoster.
I’ve been removing Google services from my life bit by bit over the past year, and I have to say it is crazy how hard it actually is! They have inserted themselves into so many digital workflows, securing monopoly positions and preventing the rise of competitors and open ecosystems. In many areas the only alternatives are other tech giants, or accepting feature downgrades and having to set things up manually.
I’m really glad that the browser is one area where the transition is actually very simple and straightforward!
UBI and copyright are not mutually exclusive. Why wouldn’t artists want to earn more on top for the work they do and the value they create, like every other profession?!
We could build a public database (like SponsorBlock) of known ad video slices and detect them that way.
I agree with everyone here that self-hosting email is never easy, but if you still decide to go down this route then here are two tips that I personally found very helpful, especially when you decide to host it at home:
The first is to get an SMTP relay server. That’s just another mail server that yours can log into to actually send its mail, just like an email client would. That way you don’t have to worry about your IP’s sending reputation, because everyone will only see the relay’s reputable IP.
Second is to configure a Backup MX. That’s an additional MX DNS entry with lower priority than the primary, and it points to a special mail server that accepts any mail for you and tries to deliver it to the primary server forever (or something like an entire week). So when your primary server is unreachable other sending servers will deliver mail to the backup, and it delivers the mail to the primary as soon as that’s back online.
You can get these as separate services, but some DNS providers (like Strato for example) offer both with the base domain package. It makes self-hosting an email server much simpler and more reliable in my experience.