- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
I don't personally cut my usage of YouTube content at all; I just simply use necessary tools to prevent the apps and services from over-sharing too much data at a network level. DNS and IP level filtering is done typically to prevent well-known domains and telemetry targets from being utilized and any account preferences are set to minimize consent given. NewPipe and FreeTube are used interchangeably with yp-dlp if needed. No account is necessary...my viewing patterns aren't being recorded except in a generalized aggregate manner which enforces a reasonable amount of privacy.
I'm of the opinion that a completely de-googled device lacks critical features I use often; and restoring equal function is oftentimes made difficult. Unfortunately this also covers video content; there's no real viable FLOSS alternative with enough content. The creators typically do not have a motivation to use PeerTube or other viable FLOSS software that does exist currently and do not publish videos there; which introduces a heavy timelag; even if the creator or even someone else IS willing to export the YT content out to PT.
Network is standard double NAT grade B. [ISP <-> Router <-> Firewall] with all necessary port forwards in place (TCP/UDP 1025-65535 to Firewall). Firewall is standard pfSense CE; and will forward invisibly and does automatically perform necessary UPnP and port forwarding as detected. STUN may be necessary but does function and establish the route(s) and the ports your application selected would ordinarily be invisibly NAT'ed quickly by the firewall as long as the packets are solicited.
ICE Candidates udp <Public IPv4>:65359 srflx udp <Public IPv6>:65363 srflx udp [<Public IPv6 /64 issued by ISP>]:54597 srflx udp [<Public IPv6 /64 issued by ISP>]:58798 srflx Error: No active TCP candidates were foundTo my knowledge your application does not appear to opinion or declare if it uses STUN. (Perhaps it should, there are valid reasons to offer STUN or not offer STUN). The application provides no meaningful errors so I can't tell what might need adjusted or allowed network-wise.
Obfuscated code is not "Source Available". You will need to provide the code without obfuscation; though I don't personally blame you if you're choosy about what reasons you will release the source for.
I'm of the opinion that you should probably provide Source Code on a "Source Available" basis to people who ask and have a need to see it to audit or self-compile. The lack of "Open-ness" in your code is disturbing.
I won't comment or judge on your decision to refuse to offer this software on a Libre basis. You absolutely have the right to monetize as necessary; especially if this code is speaking to a backend infrastructure that you maintain for it. Even if all you do is aim to break even and pay for those servers.
The experience is extremely unintuitive. I couldn't get your app to work at all on my privacy enforcing browser within the confines of my privacy enforcing LAN. (Yes; I do/did enable WebRTC and the other required technologies, however they're enabled in a privacy respecting manner.) Neither of my devices would show or remain connected once added. There were no popups or information given to me by the app to troubleshoot the issue; and I'm not going to crank open a Dev Console for something that I can't contribute to anyways. If your software is going to remain closed in source; "It should just work™".
No; it's not inarguable.
I do feel that some minor limitations around social media should exist; such as hours of the day you may not be allowed to read or post; but they should be simple age-gates created to privately verify a person's age via a simple SSO/OAuth style token. If you can't authenticate against some privacy respecting identity proving entity you probably aren't old enough and any account(s) you create would be limited.
Not all social media needs to be age-gated either; but social networks could be forced by law to avoid monetizing your account or habits at all if you don't willingly identify. (and by doing so; also CONSENT TO THIS MONETIZATION) In short; if you are not verified they're required to assume you are a child and handle your data as such...with utmost respect to your privacy.
S/MIME is insecure, outdated, depreciated, and should be discontinued; yet people don't want to adapt or grow or change.
Because some organizations do use S/MIME; all email software is required to implement it, that is if they want to be adopted and used by said influential organizations.
OpenPGP and PGP in general is secure but suffers from usability issues and is often wrongly painted as user-unfriendly. (it's really no worse than S/MIME, installing and managing keys is exactly the same hassle as it is with S/MIME.) The main issue is that some people are too lazy or resistant to change to adapt to it.
Lack of detailed audits...only in this case specifically...does not imply lack of security and/or privacy.
The protocol that Signal uses, which is in fact firmly audited with no major problematic findings, plus the fact the client is OSS is generally enough to lower any concerns.
The server side software in production for Signal.org is not OSS. It will not be. You are required to trust the server to use Signal; because the protocol and the client renders it factually impossible for the server to spy on your messages. The server cannot read messages; or even connect who is messaging who if the correct client settings are used. (Sealed Sender).
Non-OS stats software in general is not automatically lacking in privacy or security, particularly not in this case where the affected software does interact only with software that is verifiably open-source and trustworthy in general due to the protocols and how they are implemented correctly in a verifiable manner.
This just means you wrap your signal links in a URL shortener.
A slight hassle; but all the more reason to hate the muskratt.
We should be quietly linking anyone with a need to send a signal link to a nice privacy respecting URL shortening instance somewhere that will basically delete the link in 3-7 days unless told otherwise to keep it around by the user at creation.
Heck; host your own URL shortener while you're at it.
This is unsurprising. A Chinese model will be filled with censorship.
In general Fwy does not agree with the Privacy Guides assessment; and feels that the concerns about the project are simply not credible without stronger evidence of excessively slowed or missed updates.
Project devs do have lives and I'm not personally going to punish that; so long as the software remains reasonably maintained and free of bugs while still considering the project's number of devs.
Is it better than Mullvad Browser? Probably not in the strictest sense; but I'm also not happy with "Mullvad Browser" either; as this browser makes more choices that breaks functionality than Librewolf does in the pursuit of privacy.
Additionally; I cannot trust that "Mullvad Browser" will not enshittify; it is maintained by a company who is REQUIRED to some extent to make profits. That breeds enshittification. Mullvad would be one bad CEO or core executive team shift away from potentially being targeted as a profit vehicle and it's privacy benefits weakened or removed entirely so the company can make money.
In general I trust Librewolf on a pretty regular basis to protect my privacy when my Addon-driven version of manually hardened Firefox breaks up a websites functionality too badly. It provides essential privacy protections without breaking too many things and serves as a good baseline browser.
As a rule; I keep several different browsers installed to mitigate lack of website function and isolate away any websites that would be more invasive in what privacy protections must be disabled to use properly. "Setting-Hardened and Privacy-Addon-driven Firefox" is what I use day to day, but "a semi-Amnesic* Librewolf (Incognito windows if untrusted website)" is second and is used daily in trusted website scenarios or in case a website is breaking too badly from plugin interactions. Finally; a fairly vanilla and infrequently used copy of Ungoogled Chromium is kept on hand for situations where Chromium is just required; where I can spin up empty profiles easily for anything I don't trust and configure it to just flush everything on exit.
I suspect they probably do far more than their title lets on; but damn that's an extremely unfortunate title to have. I can't imagine that particular part of the title sells well on the resume.
That said; I think numbers 2 through 5 could probably see their pay halved or cut by a third and they'd still be fine. I wouldn't push anyone below 200k though. I didn't suggest the Chairperson because it appears that Mozilla isn't actually paying them, some other entity is doing so and it's being reported here for "tax purposes".
Note: This isn't to suggest that they need to cut these folks' pay right now; it's just observing where Mozilla might reduce spending if it were to become necessary to keep things going for them. I am actually assuming good faith that each of these folks are well worth their current pay.
Freetube is a useful project as it allows you to "fallback" on a non-preferred frontend.
https://github.com/FreeTubeApp/FreeTube
This allows you to continue to use Youtube irregardless of which frontend is (potentially not) working.
In 'Settings > General' you'll want to select "Invidious API" as your "Preferred API backend" and specify your favorite invidious instance in the "Current Invidious Instance" field and click "Set Current Instance as Default". This locks FreeTube into the specified instance.
Then, when you notice that FreeTube is issuing notices to you about your favorite Invidious Instance being down, you can wander back to 'Settings > General'; hit the "Clear Default Invidious Instance" Button and wait as FreeTube magically contacts the "https://api.invidious.io/" page for you and selects a new, and hopefully online and working Invidious instance. (You may have to hit this button several times to roll a working instance, Hit the button, check the subs page and see if everything loads, repeat if it falls back on the Local API.)
When you run into instances where you can't roll up a good Invidious instance; the built in Local API is running a NewPipe Extractor like API directly from your FreeTube client. Not the best; but at least it keeps things working while you wait for the Invidious devs to fix things up; and it still reasonably preserves as much of your privacy as it can while doing this to the best effort it can.
...Sadly this doesn't work when Google manages a double combo of breaking both Invidious and NewPipe; but I have found that this is less often the case and the devs of either project are usually fairly quick about getting fixes out. Bless their hard work with a donation sometime maybe, if you can.
there will be bills brought to the floor that require raw milk to be served at elementary schools.
So prove that is what they are doing. Otherwise your argument is just pure hyperbole. I get that conservatives are dangerously stupid; but don't spread falsehoods; that's how they get a turn at the stump to convince more people to join their stupid cause.
Just because it can, does not mean it will. I've yet to see any hard evidence of probabilities either; but I welcome any evidence one might present to that effect. I am always skeptical of science news reporting; as oftentimes they blow things out of proportion.
I find it frustrating that no discernable effort is being visibly made to pass this project on to another dev or group of devs.
Just unceremoniously announcing it's going down. After a successful fundraiser at the beginning of this year.
I don't know where the funds went, nor do I understand the abruptness of the closing of the project. I'm suspecting that this is a ragequit. Something happened somewhere quietly that led to the developer deciding that they cannot maintain any longer.
This is, in short, quite disappointing.
To anyone; if you do respond to this comment; do not try defend them. Instead, try to provide more context, or evidence that shows I have misread the situation. Arguing about how long he worked, or how passionate he was in the past, does not change the current facts. Provide more facts if you must argue.
If they want to drink raw milk and cough their lungs out; I am not going to stop them. The conservatives clearly wish to be left alone in their stupidity and lack of education, and we can't force them to pursue knowledge.
I also suspect that the bird flu (H5N1) is not (as of yet, at the time this post was written...) likely to mutate to spread in a human-to-human context. It's not impossible for it to do so though...but the mutation(s) have not yet reached a point where humans can pass it on to each other by breathing the same air; I would guess that a significant contact (Like breathing, eating or touching a very very very large amount of a bodily output that contains the virus) is likely needed to spread that virus; as that's how it's spread from animal to human so far. TL;DR: I could be wrong; but I don't believe it's capable of a pandemic yet. Science has not yet presented enough strong evidence that this is spreading from person to person. I welcome any citations to prove that wrong however. Thankfully I'm not conservative, and do welcome being shown that my suppositions are indeed wrong; as long as it's done respectfully.
Hearing this sort of law go into effect just makes me sadly want to ban anyone from the UK from my small communities.
I'd hate to be forced to do it; but I certainly would immediately start swinging the hammer with IP range bans and banning anyone who is clearly professing to be from the UK.
Unfortunately the kind of laws they're trying to pass do nothing to fix whatever problems they have Online; and are basically meaningless political posturing. I feel sorry for people in the UK and strongly recommend they start using VPNs; as it's the only way to ensure they won't get snared up in the ensuing waves of bans when compliance with the OSA law that they let get passed is mandatory
The shoe is clearly on the other foot. It's not so easy to manage when politicians are allowed to get so uninformed that they go out of their way to pass bad laws.
That's not third person; those are specific pronouns that Fwy uses personally.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
Unfortunately this law is unconstitutional as ever. This is nothing more than a scare tactic; as it should not survive a true challenge in the SCOTUS. If it does survive such a challenge; burn them all, congress and all.