shrugal

joined 1 year ago
[–] shrugal@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I personally don't like what RH did, but their goals were pretty clear and I don't see how that has anything to do with Fedora. It's still a very good community project that also provides great value to RH themselves, so I don't have any fears that they might stop support, start restricting access or interfering with their work.

And I completely agree with how they handled the telemetry thing. Telemetry is important, the way they want to implement it is fine with me, and they discussed it at length with the community.

[–] shrugal@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

And all the people that provide the free software RH is using and making money with don't count?! How about RH subscribe to all their projects to be able to repackage and redistribute their code, and if one of them doesn't like RH then they'll just cut them off like RH is doing to their customers. Does that sound like a good direction for the OSS ecosystem to you?

Of course RH does also provide back to the community, but that is the whole deal! You get free and open code, you give back free and open code. And they are a big company making a lot of money, so of course they should also contribute much more than a handful of devs would. That shouldn't give them the privilege to unilaterally change this deal.

I get that it's technically within the bounds of the GPL, but it's a loophole and not how an "OSS company" should act imo! The whole OSS ecosystem as we know it would collapse if all projects started doing this.

[–] shrugal@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

Also you have the ability to disable it right in the installer/welcome screen, before anything is being sent. Imo having good telemetry is important, and this is how it should be done!

[–] shrugal@lemm.ee 22 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (18 children)

I want to be able to use all the software I want on Linux, officially supported by the manufacturer. No more unofficial version that's kinda working but not really. All the hardware in my new Laptop should come with official Linux drivers, so I can actually use all the things I payed for. I want to be able to contact the support if something doesn't work, and not get a "we don't support that" as an answer. And I want to be able to truly recommend a Linux OS to my non-techy friends and family, so they too can enjoy the freedom and privacy instead of having to sell it out to big corporations because they just can't use a terminal.

I don't think this "plug in your phone and use it as PC" will ever really work. Apps and games always get more fancy and demanding as computers become more powerful, and desktop PCs will always be much more powerful than phones. E.g. a couple of years ago I thought at some point I can buy a tablet and use it for heavy duty coding because it will have become powerful enough, but all the tooling just eats up the performance increase to help you be more productive.

I also don't believe in the "OS in the cloud" thing. Always connected programs and games are shitty already, just image that with your entire OS. There are physical limitations that will always make it inferiour to a good local setup imo, at least until we figure out how to connect network devices with wormholes instead of cables. What I do believe in is having a small always-on personal server in your home, that can replace most of the cloud services we rely on today.

[–] shrugal@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Go through all the apps on your phone that have to talk to the cloud to do their job. Most of them can be replaced with privacy preserving self-hosted alternatives.

A good starting point would probably be Nextcloud. And remember to also think about a backup strategy for important data.

[–] shrugal@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I use a 1€/month domain from strato.de, a very reputable German hoster. They support DynDNS, provide a backup mx for when my home server is offline, and I use their SMTP server as relay for sending reputation. No issues so far.

[–] shrugal@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

This is not what I'm talking about, because the vast majority of people buying the game won't have seen this. It's not enough that the info is somewhere on the internet, it needs to be front and center when buying the game.

[–] shrugal@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

We left that territory years ago. There are big community projects and entire companies built on providing adblocking features. People will build it if the need and potential audience is great enough.

[–] shrugal@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

We could build a public database (like SponsorBlock) of known ad video slices and detect them that way.

[–] shrugal@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

You could have an app running in the background that detects ads based on the audio (like Shazam for music) and skips it for you. You could probably analyse all the video slices YT sends you and detect ads that way. I think as long as we are still in control of the playback devices we can find ways to make them skip ads.

[–] shrugal@lemm.ee 13 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The problem is that they don't communicate this and still ask for the full price.

Imagine I'm a gamer who wants to buy and play a working game today, not in half a year. Nothing on their store page indicates that the game isn't in a playable state yet, so I'd pay full price for a game I can't actually play. That's misleading at best, and a downright fraud at worst.

They could easily fix this by delaying the game or launching it as early access for people who don't mind playtesting a half-finished game, but they didn't.

[–] shrugal@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Your arguments would only work if you'd argue for breaking up or nationalizing YouTube.

As long as they are a for-profit company you can't deny them the right to legally earn money the way they see fit, doesn't matter how big they are or what other revenue streams they have. Forcing them to offer a service for free is nonsense, and attacking them on a technicality that is probably easily circumvented is just a waste of everybody's time and money imo.

If we really want to do something about this then we have to break their monopoly, same as any other huge company that's f*cking with consumers.

view more: ‹ prev next ›