Thank you almighty government and almighty corporations for graciously granting me this right to do something I should have been able to do without asking permission.
How does CentOS compare to Debian regarding "old and super tested versions of software"? Is it mainly a preference thing why you'd Rocky Linux over something like Debian which is also community led?
Its far better to have as much of an "Upstream first" mentality as possible. The more Linux distros cause unnecessary fragmentation, the more we will see duplication of effort which reduced the quality of software for everyone.
Interesting that neofetch reports the distro as RHEL. Under Rocky linux, does /etc/os-release report itself as RHEL instead of Rocky Linux? Does Alma Linux, CentOS, or CentOS Stream also do that?
I've been looking at the CentOS situation a little and I have to wonder...what were the reasons you chose Rocky Linux specifically instead of Alma Linux, CentOS Stream, or even RHEL itself up to 16 computers using the free developer program? Not that I think Rocky Linux is a bad choice, just thought it was an interesting choice for a laptop compared to something like Fedora even.
Does the desktop version also have local connectivity through bluetooth or local wifi like the android app? Might be interesting to use at a base station to facilitate communication between multiple points in a line of sight wifi network... but then I guess you could just setup an XMPP or Matrix server to accomplish the same thing, I guess. Always liked Briar though.
Mullvad actually allows you to generate a random user id number string, write that on a piece of paper, then send that paper and cash through the mail to pay for VPN time. It wouldn't be quick, but its possible.
"I'm fine with entirely proprietary software and hardware on my computer as long as I get to run it on my computer and not just streaming my desktop to me over the internet where I have no control over it" -them in the future (probably)
We need an organization like the fsf that has a hardline stance on free software because if we don't, we will end up in a world where free software advocates will be saying things like the above paragraph. A world where no software freedom exists because we forgot to teach our own children why software freedom is important.
But at the same time, I understand the sentiment the author has regarding the practical use of free software in the modern world. If someone could only be "truly free" if they ran outdated hardware, that would seal the tomb on the free software movement leading into the future. Free software advocates would be forced to be kept in the past with zero relevance going forward.
The more organizations promoting free software like the Free Software Foundation and Software Freedom Conservancy the better off the world will be.
In one way, it could be argued that this has a positive side to it. As more people consider Linux adoption, malware authors are noticing that and determining that it is worth their time to write a linux version of their malware.
More sources is always better to increase the reach of these technologies. We need to flood the internet with projects like this to make privacy more mainstream.
I know what the difference between Arch and Parabola is, but I'm not sure the differences are large enough to warrant an entire separate community away from an Arch specific one. What could a Parabola community possibly talk about that couldn't be posted in an Arch community with a Parabola tag or something?
Interesting perspective I hadn't thought of before. Thanks for your comment.