[–] 1 point 3 weeks ago

As far as I can understand, only /boot has to be on a fat/ext4/iso9660 partition (apart from efi which has to be on a fat by itself). As efi is mounted on /boot/efi, I figure we'll need 2 separate partitions besides / (and whatever other partitions we might want to separate / into).

I start to worry that more and more of the system has to be uncovered to an attacker: if you keep the distro's kernel, it'll be easy to figure out the system installed on / so 90% of the data on disk will be known. No need for luks except for /home.

Is there a way to have whole disk encryption on linux and secure boot at the same time? efi already has to be unencrypted right? Now /boot...

Can systemd-boot save the day?

  • source
  •  

    É impressão minha, ou esta conversa de "soberania digital" está a descambar para o provincianismo?

    Sou proponente do afastamento dos colonos americanos desde pequeno, mas nunca confundi isso com racismo ou nacionalismo bacoco. Defendo o software livre desde há muitos anos (desde que o descobri), mas não me parece que "criar uma clowd europeia" comprando recursos à Amazon venha a ser a solução. Hoje ouvi falar de "redes sociais europeias"... er... isso quer dizer "gaiolas douradas"?! Não obrigado!

    Que tal fazer as coisas de mansinho, sem alarido e ir substituindo aquilo que nos torna dependentes por alternativas mundiais (não só europeias) sem que se dê por isso?

    Que tal favorecer o método do software livre (financiando em função da liberdade que garante, por exemplo, promovendo o seu uso e ensino nas instituições de ensino...) em vez de "comprar" uma solução fechada só porque é europeia mesmo que copie o método do colonizador?

    Que tal deixar de dar dinheiro a "esgotos a céu aberto" - sério, há dias ouvi esta descrição do twitter - e começar a usar exclusivamente o fediverse e o atmosphere como canais "oficiais" e decentes de comunicação?

    Bolas! Hoje estou novamente a sentir-me pessimista.

     

    Hoje aconteceu-me pela primeira vez: o f-droid propos-me uma atualização duma app (que ainda não explorei muito bem, mas pensava faze-lo em breve) e eu fui atualizar. O google play protect bloqueou a atualização.

    A app em questão é a flexify.

    Existe um issue recente no github.

    Tentei determinar se houve grandes mexidas no código recentemente, mas não me pareceu. Também, para introduzir uma vulnerabilidade não é preciso grandes alterações...

    O que acham?

    São já reflexos da política de segurança da google?

    [–] [S] 1 point 1 year ago

    That's another issue I have: Maybe that could be resolved by implementing something similar to (or exactly) openid.

    I feel the software we choose might limits us on the kind of thing we're interested in, that's why I have to have a lemmy account - I wouldn't have a discussion like this one on mastodon, for example - and a mastodon account. Maybe a pixelfed account, a peertube account... what a mess! But that's a subject for another discussion (this discussion was "Permanently Deleted"?!).

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] [S] 1 point 1 year ago

    You might be right about being able to do almost anything whatever the instance you choose, as long as you already figured it all out, but having an account at a lemmy server, and two at two different mastodon servers, I do have the feeling that the presence on any of them is a different experience.

    Don't forget that what most people's experience on the fediverse comes probably via mastodon and that they start by getting most of their content via home and local feeds. Federated comes third, i guess.

    I am still struggling to find content on some of my preferred topics...

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] [S] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    That's what I was thinking about.

    I have to acknowledge the point @otter@lemmy.ca makes about there being a collision with the term "community" in the threadiverse perspective. Maybe "home" or even "tribe" or "people" would be a better fit. But I still do think that "community" encompasses the feeling best, and that collision will be promptly resolved once the user understands what communities really are on that narrower scope.

    That's maybe a compromise we will (have to | want to) make.

    Once again - that's my feeling, but I could be wrong.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  •  

    It stroke me that saying things like "First, you have to choose a comunity to join the fediverse" might be a better way to ease onboarding nwecommers than "First, you have to choose a server".

    Although the latter might be technically more accurate, the former is what people might

    • understand better;
    • ends up being what they're really doing;
    • frighten them less;
    • reinforce the "community" contribution aspect;
    • lead them to better understand the federated aspect as they realize that communities are not isolated and can talk to eachother.

    What do you think?

    "Let me know in the comments bellow..." - just kidding!

     

    On mastodon, I'm starting to be followed by accounts I have no relationship with at all (a famous guy I doubt would ever follow me, a supposed magazine about a subject I never talked about and with a name not really related to the subject of their posts...).

    Is this a trend? Is it a strategy to get people to follow them back so they have more followers? Is this the fediverse version of spam?

     

    On another post, I shared a thought I've been having. Here's another one:

    Would it be possible to create a platform for federated link share and discussion? That's one of the things I really miss - the possibility to discuss, with a group of like minded people, content I stumble upon on the internet.

    The image is just another provocation, of course. ;-)

    "digg deeper" as a joke on digg logo.
     

    I've been seeing these "why not federated " popping up here from time to time, so i figured I could make two suggestions (a suggestion and a question, really) that have been popping up in my mind as well.

    Let me ask the question first, in this post, and make the suggestion on another post, to keep the discussion clean:

    Wouldn't it be better to have the fediverse be a server only (like mail, or usenet - as federated as can be) and then have clientes like mastodon, lemmy, whatever... be just clientes to that server?

    The post would have fields like author, date and time, subject or title, text resume, text content, image, link, video, x, y, z, ... Then clientes would fetch whatever they are interested in (maybe mastodon would focus on author, date, image and text resume, pixelfed on image, peertube on video, lemmy on all of them... a blog would fetch the author, the date, the title, possibly text resume to use as lead, and text content and display that as a blog entry...

    Information could, then, just flow via jason, xml (xmpp, why not)

    Maybe I'm being naive here, but would very much like to understand why.

    Of course the server would authenticate and distribute to other servers and to clientes what they ask for.

    The image is a little provocation, of course ;-)

    Iconic usenet image.
    view more: next ›