renzev

joined 10 months ago
[–] renzev@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

If you're interested in another approach to containerizing GUI applications, also checkout out x11docker. It's a small independent project maintained by one guy, nothing big like flatpak, but also pretty cool. The name is actually a bit limiting -- it supports both docker and podman, and can run wayland apps as well. One of the coolest features, in my opinion, is the ability to run a separate X server inside every sandbox and forward individual windows to the "host" X server. That way you can prevent apps from spying on your keyboard or other apps' windows.

[–] renzev@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

The thing with appimages is that they expect the developer to have full knowledge of what libraries need to be bundled with their app, which makes it difficult to make truly universal appimages. In flatpak you just select one of a set list of runtimes and add any additional dependencies on top of it. Flatpak also re-uses the files for each runtime in between the different apps that use it, which saves a lot of disk space.

[–] renzev@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Why not containerise everything? You need libreoffice? No problem, here is a docker or podman container.

Flatpak is basically GUI-optimized containers. It uses the same technology (namespaces) as docker and podman, just with some extra tools to make GUI-related things work properly. That's why flatpak apps don't use the system's gtk version -- they're running in a sandbox with a different rootfs. You can spawn a shell into the sandbox of a specific app with flatpak run --command=sh com.yourapp.YourApp and poke around it if you want to.

[–] renzev@lemmy.world 42 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Oh, what the fuck!?

TBH I wouldn't mind it that much. The whole point of flatpak is that the developer can do whatever demented satanic rituals they want inside of the sandbox, and it won't contaminate the rest of the system.

[–] renzev@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Thanks. Lemmy.world should get a bot going for this or something.

[–] renzev@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Sorry, but in my book, actions speak louder than words. And the actions here are very clear: they made a useful service that benefited people. They paid for it out of their pocket and suffered major inconveniences in their personal lives to keep the service operational and to uphold their ideals of transparency. It's a net positive contribution to the world, even if you account for the offensive/hurtful jokes they made along the way.

You can spend hours talking about what people should or should not have done. Critiquing others from your high horse is easy, but it gets you nowhere. As another example, take Lemmy's developers. You could go on for hours denouncing their tankie/authoritarian views, but it won't change the fact that they created an anti-authoritarian and censorship-resistant platform that benefits many people.

What I value personally is a consistent moral framework. What someone thinks on isolated issues or what kind of offensive humor they like is a lot less relevant to me. Do I disapprove of it? Yes. But do I condemn them for it? No. Because actions speak louder than words.

[–] renzev@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

are also used by fringe organisations to push their ideologies and discuss wild conspiracy theories and plots.

Might Discord be, potentially, in some way related to the notorious hacker known as 4chan 🤣

[–] renzev@lemmy.world 14 points 3 days ago (3 children)

It's probably good that a free and private email service might shut down because... they registered a few edgy domains that they no longer use? Wow

[–] renzev@lemmy.world 19 points 3 days ago

Thanks for sharing this. Never really used cockli that much, but still appreciate their service. Nothing makes the glowies seethe harder than a privacy-friendly email service, I hope it stays afloat. Donated!

[–] renzev@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

A lot of "hardware raid" is just a separate controller doing software raid. I thought I lost access to a bunch of data when my raid controller died, before I realized that I could just plug the disks directly into the computer and mount them with mdadm. But yes, hardware raid seems a bit pointless nowadays.

[–] renzev@lemmy.world -3 points 2 weeks ago

It’s going to confuse everyday users

Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I believe this is the intention. I think big companies deliberately put in confusing and bad design to "test the waters" and see if people will still buy their products. It's the same with the apple mouse charging on the bottom, or why companies keep making their logos uglier with each iteration. It's a psy-op to condition the masses into accepting worse products without complaining.

 

It's funny when armchair experts insist that the fediverse won't catch on because "federation is too hard to understand" when arguably the most widespread communication system on the internet follows the same model

 
771
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by renzev@lemmy.world to c/linuxmemes@lemmy.world
 
 
 

It's impressive how duckduckgo manages to be so much better than bing despite being a frontend for bing

 

I've just been playing around with https://browserleaks.com/fonts . It seems no web browser provides adequate protection for this method of fingerprinting -- in both brave and librewolf the tool detects rather unique fonts that I have installed on my system, such as "IBM Plex" and "UD Digi Kyokasho" -- almost certainly a unique fingerprint. Tor browser does slightly better as it does not divulge these "weird" fonts. However, it still reveals that the google Noto fonts are installed, which is by far not universal -- on a different machine, where no Noto fonts are installed, the tool does not report them.

For extra context: I've tested under Linux with native tor browser and flatpak'd Brave and Librewolf.

What can we do to protect ourselves from this method of fingerprinting? And why are all of these privacy-focused browsers vulnerable to it? Is work being done to mitigate this?

 

Context: LaTeX is a typesetting system. When compiling a document, a lot of really in-depth debugging information is printed, which can be borderline incomprehensible to anyone but LaTeX experts. It can also be a visual hindrance when looking for important information like errors.

 
 

Context for newbies: Linux refers to network adapters (wifi cards, ethernet cards, etc.) by so called "interfaces". For the longest time, the interface names were assigned based on the type of device and the order in which the system discovered it. So, eth0, eth1, wlan0, and wwan0 are all possible interface names. This, however, can be an issue: "the order in which the system discovered it" is not deterministic, which means hardware can switch interface names across reboots. This can be a real issue for things like servers that rely on interface names staying the same.

The solution to this issue is to assign custom names based on MAC address. The MAC address is hardcoded into the network adaptor, and will not change. (There are other ways to do this as well, such as setting udev rules).

Redhat, however, found this solution too simple and instead devised their own scheme for assigning network interface names. It fails at solving the problem it was created to solve while making it much harder to type and remember interface names.

To disable predictable interface naming and switch back to the old scheme, add net.ifnames=0 and biosdevname=0 to your boot paramets.

The template for this meme is called "stop doing math".

 

Firefox on Debian stable is so old that websites yell at you to upgrade to a newer browser. And last time I tried installing Debian testing (or was it debian unstable?), the installer shat itself trying to make the bootloader. After I got it to boot, apt refused to work because of a missing symlink to busybox. Why on earth do they even need busybox if the base install already comes with full gnu coreutils? I remember Debian as the distro that Just Wroks(TM), when did it all go so wrong? Is anyone else here having similar issues, or am I doing something wrong?

 

Context:

Permissive licenses (commonly referred to as "cuck licenses") like the MIT license allow others to modify your software and release it under an unfree license. Copyleft licenses (like the Gnu General Public License) mandate that all derivative works remain free.

Andrew Tanenbaum developed MINIX, a modular operating system kernel. Intel went ahead and used it to build Management Engine, arguably one of the most widespread and invasive pieces of malware in the world, without even as much as telling him. There's nothing Tanenbaum could do, since the MIT license allows this.

Erik Andersen is one of the developers of Busybox, a minimal implementation of that's suited for embedded systems. Many companies tried to steal his code and distribute it with their unfree products, but since it's protected under the GPL, Busybox developers were able to sue them and gain some money in the process.

Interestingly enough, Tanenbaum doesn't seem to mind what intel did. But there are some examples out there of people regretting releasing their work under a permissive license.

 

Credit for the answer used in the right panel: https://serverfault.com/a/841150

view more: next ›