theroff

Your work computer likely contains personally identifiable information. Microsoft very likely has a significant profile on what you do at work and could conceivably link that to your other identities outside of work.

Are they actually doing that? It's hard to say. Microsoft does have relationships with data brokers like Snowflake Inc. and SCUBA plus its own internal capabilities like Xandr Inc.

Cross pollination is more than possible when employees use personsal devices to login to work accounts. Most of the people that I work with login to Slack on their personal device using Microsoft Entra SSO.

My previous job, yes! A few people had that fight years before I started and won. It was decided on the basis that we're Linux sysadmins who already operate a sizeable fleet of Linux systems and running our own desktops would be beneficial and self-supported.

Sadly my current employer doesn't share this view. We used a crippled Linux desktop through Apache Guacamole which is a bit average to say the least. I have to put up with the constant bullshit that is Windows and all of its ads, news headlines and trash that I don't want on my computer at work. I hate it but I have very little influence in that space.

yggmail specifically, probably not. yggdrasil uses TCP/IP and the Meshtastic latencies to perform connections would be too high AFAIK. It would probably only work in a fairly well-connected network. yggdrasil could be used directly over a WiFi protocol but it would need fairly good reception to function.

N.B. I haven'texperimented with this myself.

yggmail is a fairly obscure and experimental take on email on a mesh network: https://github.com/neilalexander/yggmail

https://forums.debian.net/ exists for Debian

Graphene shills have been banging on this point for donkey's ages. Reality is that many people use phones that are out of OEM support and many OEM ROMs are bundled with questionable software (Oppo, Samsung etc.) There are some decent criticisms to be made about LineageOS, but others to be made about Grapheme, like its Google-suggestive configurations, which is quite bad for security and privacy. Graphene says this is all optional and not part of the OS, but doesn't include any equivalent F-Droid installer.

My original reply to the OP's question, thoughts and experiences with GrapheneOS, was along the lines of "I think GrapheneOS is Google-centric" and you disagreed saying that GrapheneOS was a "blank slate". Honestly I think you're being a bit defensive and maybe a little gaslighty which is why I downvoted.

GrapheneOS provides fairly prominent links to a Google Play installer or the relatively obscure Aurora Store. The Aurora Store client app is FOSS but the store is quite literally a proxy for the Google Play Store. The apps in the screenshots on Ausora Store's homepage are mostly apps that use or require Google Play Services. This is all very Google-centric.

If Google Play wasn't an important part of GrapheneOS, it could just not contain a prominent link to the Google Play installer. Or it could contain a link to install a fairly prominent app store that offers an ecosystem outside of Google Play. But it exclusively steers users to the Google Play ecosystem as a part of the default, packaged experience, hence my original reply to the OP.

But it is Google Play-centric. There is an option to install Google Play. There is not an option to install other app stores like F-Droid, unlike some of the other AOSP clones.

Screenshot for you. Google is explicitly linked to for easy setup. F-Droid is not. "There is nothing" is simply disingenuous.

I use GrapheneOS but I don't like how Google Play-centric it is. It is geared towards people installing their "normal" apps with the GrapheneOS special sauce sandboxing. No F-Droid by default where all of the FOSS apps are.

I sold my car last year and barely gave it a secomd thought (I still have access to a car on weekends). Money, environment and space-saving were all factors.

I don't think government should be in the business of subsidising driving (which is currently the case in multiple ways). Instead that money should be used to make public and active transport safe, convenient and reliable.

Here's the actual paper of the technology (Prio) that it's based on.

Some problems stand out:

• It requires that the organisations (Mozilla and ISRG) not collude to decrypt the secret share (probably reasonable)
• The paper suggests registering end users to protect against Sybil attacks.
• The scheme requires the organisations to correctly withhold results from advertisers until there are sufficient results.

I'm not overly familiar with the tech stack but I'd be concerned about browsers using a persistent UUID to send impressions to Mozilla's API.

The biggest elephant in the room is that seemingly nobody wants the damn thing. It offers nothing to users, except maybe a good feeling inside that they're supporting AdTech. It offers AdTech less than the current deal where they can collect obscene amounts of personal information for targeted advertising.