Privacy

hideshow 38 child comments

[–] southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago (20 children)

If you think that some asshole won't be willing to legislate that away, think again. It might be the last refuge, but it is entirely possible to shut that down

hideshow 20 child comments

parent

[–] artyom@piefed.social 13 points 1 month ago (17 children)

Legislate whatever you want, you can't stop free software.

hideshow 17 child comments

parent

[–] FineCoatMummy@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 month ago (12 children)

you can’t stop free software.

No. But you CAN stop providing any online services to free software.

G already has been moving toward requiring a "trusted OS" to get past fucking recaptcha. It isn't rolled out yet. But it could be.

Linux can't stop that, b/c it can just be blocked from everything if the trusted OS attestation isn't present.

hideshow 12 child comments

parent

[–] DFX4509B@lemmy.wtf 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

And hypothetically that reCAPTCHA could also serve as an ID of sorts:

Any Google account verified 18+ gets full web access.

Any Google account 14-17 gets mildly restricted access.

Any Google account 9-13 gets heavily restricted access.

Any Google account 8 and under or anyone without a Google account is locked out entirely.

.... That could be a pretty effective way to completely lock down the web. And then moving everyone back to time-sharing on rented terminals will be the final nail in the coffin for personal computing. If Big Tech gets their way, personal computing could be killed off by thin clients or terminal apps connected to a rented cloud server.

parent

[–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 1 month ago (10 children)

No. But you CAN stop providing any online services to free software.

Good news, I already don't do that. But lots and lots of people do without any company involved at all.

G already has been

Are you just not going to explain what "G" is?

Linux can't stop that

It...doesnt have to?

hideshow 10 child comments

parent

[–] FineCoatMummy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago (9 children)

Good news, I already don’t do that

You do it for every single thing you do online. The goal of many govs and big tech is to gate everything behind an attestation requirement. Everything.

That's the point. The initial move here is extremely weak attestation. You can just lie to it, or use an OSS OS. But they won't stop there. If everything gets gated behind strong attestation, then all those things become off limits to Linux. Sure, you can keep using your Linux box in your house. That cannot be stopped. But what CAN be stopped, is your ability to do anything whatsoever with it which requires the internet. Heck, even the ability to get a n/w connection can be gated.

hideshow 9 child comments

parent

[–] artyom@piefed.social 3 points 1 month ago* (8 children)

No? I sure don't.

If everything gets gated behind strong attestation, then all those things become off limits to Linux

So you think everyone will just abandon free software?

hideshow 8 child comments

parent

[–] 4am@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 month ago

You're still out to brunch I see

You still think there are things you can do on the internet that won't be affected by this

Are you actually naive, or are you being intentionally obtuse?

So you think everyone will just abandon free software?

Free software will no longer work with anything important online for participation in society. Therefore it will never take off. Therefore all consumers will be herded into cloud-streamed software on little baby walled garden tablets and fed AI answers with system prompts instructing the model not to talk about sensitive subjects. What genocide in Gaza? The Gazans are HAPPY about the ceasefire! Trumps name in the Epstien files? Turns out Adam Schiff doctored the evidence, he was never in the Epstien files! America votes for Eric to be the next President! 1000 years Trump dynasty! You'll never get tired of winning!

Don't say anything bad though, or they'll fucking debank you

parent

[–] FineCoatMummy@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 month ago* (6 children)

No? I sure don’t.

You sure do. I don't think you quite realize the possible implications.

So you think everyone will just abandon free software?

Everyone? No. Ofc not. But most home users? Yes. If we ever see strong attestation gating requiring a "trusted" OS, then I expect most who use linux today would abandon it. B/c everything they want to do, won't work. But it will work with Android, IOS, Windows. Big-tech trusted platforms. Data centers and so on will be able to use Linux... by abiding the attestation reqs.

Ofc it won't be every single last person or every single use. There are offline uses for computers too. But normal ppl want to use online services with that laptop on their desk. They want to bank. Shop. Use social media. Etc.

hideshow 6 child comments

parent

[–] artyom@piefed.social -1 points 1 month ago (5 children)

You sure do. I don’t think you quite realize the possible implications.

I absolutely do not. I don't think you quite know what you're talking about.

Everyone? No. Ofc not. But most home users? Yes.

I'm using Linux. I don't care what "most home users" do.

But it will work with Android, IOS, Windows. Big-tech trusted platforms

We are talking about Linux. Do you not know what Linux is?

hideshow 5 child comments

parent

[–] 4am@lemmy.zip 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

Oh, i just had to read further to get my answer, you're being a shithead on purpose.

parent

[–] artyom@piefed.social 1 point 1 month ago

I am not "being a shithead". I am trying to have a discussion. You, on the other hand, are being extremely rude for absolutely no reason, so goodbye now.

parent

[–] FineCoatMummy@sh.itjust.works 1 point 1 month ago (2 children)

But it will work with Android, IOS, Windows. Big-tech trusted platforms

We are talking about Linux. Do you not know what Linux is?

At this point I begin to think you are simply a troll.

The point was that if those OSs work for the things normal ppl want to do, and Linux doesn't, then most ppl won't consider Linux as a viable platform, and will not use it. Under that possible future.

I’m using Linux. I don’t care what “most home users” do.

But you asked, and I am quoting you exactly,

So you think everyone will just abandon free software?

My answer was to your question. It was not about YOU personally. You asked about "everyone", so I answered. You are welcome to not care what most ppl want. But the capability to deny your linux machine so much as basic network connectivity can happen. If you want to yank the network cable and use it in your house, and you are happy with that, then great.

If you want to engage in a non-troll manner, that's fine. But I will not reply to troll type responses any further.

hideshow 2 child comments

parent

[–] artyom@piefed.social -1 points 1 month ago (1 child)

At this point I begin to think you are simply a troll.

Funny, I was just thinking the same.

The point was that if those OSs work for the things normal ppl want to do, and Linux doesn't,

Why wouldn't it?

But you asked, and I am quoting you exactly,

I did no such thing.

It was not about YOU personally. You asked about "everyone",

In order for me to not use it, it would have to be abandoned by everyone. That was my point.

parent

[–] 4am@lemmy.zip 0 points 1 month ago

The point was that if those OSs work for the things normal ppl want to do, and Linux doesn’t,

Why wouldn’t it?

We literally had a whole thread about it, which you refused to participate in because "my machine works for me right now"

It's fine, whatever, if this is who people on this planet are then we've already fucking failed as a species

parent

[–] southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago (3 children)

You can legislate it to the point that it's only possible to spread or hand to hand, and doing so is illegal. Hell, they could go a step further and make just having a copy of it within your house illegal, even if it wasn't installable.

In any real terms, that means the only way to keep a foss os is to build it entirely yourself. Not build it from source, but code the source from the ground up. It would take time to happen, but when enough time passes, both only do the skills necessary to do that fade, but hardware changes being closed would add another layer of difficulty. Look at the pain in the ass that android rom developers have trying to get AOSP going on a given device.

I get it, I get the dream of a dedicated and determined underground keeping Linux alove under an oppressive regime, but it isn't realistic

hideshow 3 child comments

parent

[–] artyom@piefed.social 3 points 1 month ago (1 child)

I don't agree. They would have to ban the entirety of free software, in which case they'd take down pretty much the entirety of all software in the process.

Also TOR is a thing.

parent

[–] treverflume@lemmy.ml 1 point 1 month ago

yeah like all these countries across the world aren't getting news outside their firewalls lol

parent

[–] Sergio@piefed.social 2 points 1 month ago

Basically the plot of https://analognowhere.com/

parent

[–] gandalfthewhite@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 month ago

You can fine public orgs but it will just go underground unless they permanantly shut off all internet infrastructure which they will not do

parent

[–] DFX4509B@lemmy.wtf 2 points 1 month ago

As I pointed out, and is already actively underway on mobiles with regards to GrapheneOS and LineageOS, apps and services could always start blocking Linux.

parent

[–] eremophila@lemmy.zip -4 points 1 month ago* (16 children)

torvalds is pro ai

debian is ai

ubuntu is ai

linux is conforming/selling out

hideshow 16 child comments

parent

[–] artyom@piefed.social 8 points 1 month ago (5 children)

I don't understand what that has to do with this conversation.

hideshow 5 child comments

parent

[–] eremophila@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 month ago (4 children)

linux no longer looks like it is likely to remain an escape route from all of this bullshit.

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[–] artyom@piefed.social 2 points 1 month ago (3 children)

How do you figure?

hideshow 3 child comments

parent

[–] eremophila@lemmy.zip 0 points 1 month ago (2 children)

How do you not figure?

hideshow 2 child comments

parent

[–] artyom@piefed.social 2 points 1 month ago (1 child)

LOL that's not how this works.

parent

[–] eremophila@lemmy.zip 0 points 1 month ago

"LOL" indeed

parent

[–] Sanguine@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 month ago

This blanket statement does not capture the reality / nuance. They are pro AI in the sense of using it as a tool for development not to shackle the entire human race into a surveillance state.

parent

[–] t3rmit3@beehaw.org 1 point 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

I was going to give you the benefit of the doubt until I saw your responses.

"Is AI" is meaningless drivel. Software does not become "AI", and an OS is not and cannot "be" AI.

What you mean is, "Debian devs use LLMs to code", which has no impact on or correlation to whether Debian will include age or ID verification. No one ordered the devs to use LLMs, so that is not evidence of their "compliance" with authorities, as you seem to imply.

These snarkily-delivered insinuations have no value; they're not educating anyone about the topic, they're not arguing anything of substance, they lack basic technical understanding of what they're criticizing... they're just a feel-good gotcha for you.

hideshow 5 child comments

parent

[–] eremophila@lemmy.zip 1 point 1 month ago (4 children)

"is ai" is very obviously a simplification, but is also the reality of where they have chosen to go.

The manner in which debian conducted their transition, says a great deal about them.

You were not going to give me the benefit of the doubt, don't expect anyone who is genuine to believe otherwise. The subject of ai is mainly polar. the majority of people on lemmy are not experiencing their 1st day on the internet.

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[–] t3rmit3@beehaw.org 0 points 1 month ago (3 children)

You were not going to give me the benefit of the doubt, don’t expect anyone who is genuine to believe otherwise.

You're free to be as cynical as you like.

“is ai” is very obviously a simplification, but is also the reality of where they have chosen to go.

It's not a "simplification". A simplification is still roughly the same meaning. "Coded with AI" and "Is AI" are unrelated statements, not more or less nuanced versions of each other, any more than "Bill is driving a racecar" and "Bill is a racecar" are.