suppenloeffel

Mullvad certifiably doesn't log. Their VPN infrastructure even transitioned to RAM-only a few months back. They've been raided by the police and nothing was confiscated because there was nothing to confiscate. Obviously they have a list of registered accounts and payments, but without any connection to - well, connections.

I get what you mean though and mostly agree: There are only a few providers I trust enough to shift said trust from the ISP to them.

As mentioned in the comment you replied to: Yes, trusting a third party is a compromise. But you are also trusting a third party when renting a server for a private VPN endpoint, as well. A third party provider with probably a lot more logging going on than a trusted service such as Mullvad. While being way more exposed.

Since TOR isn't feasible for most users 24/7, trusted commercial VPNs are the next best thing when the alternative is your ISP logging everything you do.

This is something I've not understood yet. If you rent a server somewhere to use as a private VPN endpoint, your clear IP will be pretty much the only one connecting to the server. Correlating your traffic and your clear IP to your masked IP is easy for sufficiently motivated, able actors.

Meanwhile, the main benefit of a shared VPN such as Mullvad is that many users simultaneously use the same endpoint, making it much harder to identify the user (taking only IP and traffic into account), provided they don't log your traffic.

So while having control over your endpoint is nice, how does that actually contribute anything meaningful to your privacy?

Yikes. This has the potential to seriously damage the reputation of Mozilla. I guess there are 3 possibilities:

• Onerep isn't actually shady, but partnering with a company part of a conglomerate with companies directly opposing the stated goal isn't a good look either way
• Onerep is shady and Mozilla failed to conduct the necessary research before partnering with them
• Onerep is shady and Mozilla knew

In any case: Personally, I'll never not be grateful towards Mozilla for continuing to support and develop Firefox, which is quite literally the only relevant engine standing against the monopoly of chromium and all the bad that entails. But I trust other companies/initiatives/projects more when it comes to services other than the browser engine.

Ah, the meaning of my comment went straight over your head and you resort to throwing insults around.

I'll spell it out then: The fact that the first shot merely went through his mouth, from one cheek to the other makes it entirely possible, even probable, that Gary Webb commited suicide. Even his ex-wife said so:

Webb's ex-wife, Susan Bell, told reporters that she believed Webb had died by suicide.[72] "The way he was acting it would be hard for me to believe it was anything but suicide," she said. According to Bell, Webb had been unhappy for some time over his inability to get a job at another major newspaper. He had sold his house the week before his death because he was unable to afford the mortgage.

Spreading unfounded, exaggerated conspiracy theories while not even getting the facts straight isn't helping anyone but the perpetrators, especially when the CIA actually did commit some atrocious crimes that can be cited by stating facts instead of fiction.

The first shot went through his face, and exited at his left cheek. The coroner's staff concluded that the second shot hit an artery.

Not quite the back of the head.

Gaming on Linux has come a long way and I always prefer to run it on Linux rather than a dedicated Windows boot, if possible.

But if you rely on VRR, DLSS and have a decent HDR display, Linux unfortunately still isn't quite there yet. VRR/HDR is mostly unsupported systemwide currently. DLSS sometimes works, sometimes requires a lot of debugging and ends up actually hurting the performance.

If your hardware setup allows you to run your games at a decent framerate without DLSS/VRR, this likely won't be an issue for you.

Doesn't even have to be malice. I'm sure that most instance admins are great, competent and caring, but setting up a Lemmy instance is trivial, securing it is not.

The default configuration of a proxy could log connections, the config interface may accidentally be exposed unprotected and so on. Again, I'm not saying that most instances are inherently untrustworthy. But, depending on your instance, you are trusting one person or a small team of volunteers to stay on top of everything andyou can't expect them to drain their bank accounts in case of legal issues for you.

What?

Lemmy instances can log IPs and any other info they want all day long, there is nothing stopping them. In some jurisdictions they may even be required to.

Yeah, I mostly agree on that. Nuclear may be more expensive and risky, but it's also very predictable. That kind of enables it to act as a sort of safety net to smooth over the variable nature of renewables, though changing the output of a nuclear power plant is a very slow process, AFAIK.

I'm not against nuclear power per se, I'm viewing it as more of a band-aid until more mature and universal grid buffers can fill the gap smoothing out the renewable input. Nuclear may very well be a necessary step for some nations to reach their climate targets, I'm not informed enough to judge that. But I fear that the money invested, lobbying and public opinion influenced by that seemingly easy alternative directly hinder the development and deployment of technologies that lead to a renewable, cheap and reliable grid.

Thank you for taking the time.

I'm pretty sure that nuclear power is vastly more expensive to produce and maintain. Especially when comparing to solar/wind, since fossil power isn't desirable at all due to emissions.

Solar and wind generation is so much more efficient than even two decades ago, newer designs of nuclear plants aren't really any more efficient, but safer and more expensive. So I'm still not getting the push for more nuclear.

43% of Linux Gamers are Steam Deck users, most popular Nvidia GPU for linux (steam) gamers still is the 1060 while the most popular Desktop GPU still is the AMD RX 480.

Isn't nuclear one, if not the most, expensive form of energy production once you factor in stuff like maintenance and disposal?

Not trying to do the whole hot take thing here, I genuinely don't get why investing in nuclear is still pursued versus investing in renewable sources when mobility and land isn't an issue.

EDIT:

“Tackling the climate crisis means we must modernize our approach to all clean energy sources, including nuclear,” said Representative Diana DeGette, Democrat of Colorado. “Nuclear energy is not a silver bullet, but if we’re going to get to net zero carbon emissions by 2050, it must be part of the mix.”

kind of provides at least a partial answer: Time. Though this quote gave me graphite control rod vibes:

Some Democrats and Republicans in Congress have criticized the N.R.C. for being too slow in approving new designs. Many of the regulations that the commission uses, they say, were designed for an older era of reactors and are no longer appropriate for advanced reactors that may be inherently safer.