Show more

For all the amazing potential of technology to be useful it must be unrestricted. We need Device Neutrality, for example, so that users can (un)install any software they want.

fsfe.org/news/2023/news-202303

The plot thickens!

Silicon Valley Bank chief pressed Congress to weaken risk regulations
theguardian.com/business/2023/

> CEO Greg Becker personally led the bank’s half-million-dollar push to reduce scrutiny of his institution – and lawmakers obliged

> [T]he bank was lobbying lawmakers on “financial regulatory reform” and the Systemic Risk Designation Improvement Act of 2015 – a bill that was the precursor to legislation ultimately signed by President Donald Trump

🤡 🤣 :blobcatpopcorn:

#SVB

Show thread

One thing I haven't figured out how to do well is to simultaneously laud good acts while blasting the bad acts. For example, insists that Chromebooks be unlockable so users can install any OS. That's great! The same Google insists Chromebooks cannot allow "Unknown Sources" even though always has. This looks like plain old monopolistic abuse. Or the team works in public and behaves much more like a free software project, while forces users to login. Any tips?

Just tagged v2.2.1 of fdroidserver tools package, and uploaded it to pypi.org, , and our PPA. This version has passed autopkgtest in Debian/bookworm, so it looks like it should make it into bookworm without further work tracker.debian.org/pkg/fdroids

The etc story repeats the story in terms of how it will impact society. They are built on the kernel of a useful idea, but their structures heavily preference harmful use cases. enabled , tax fraud, investment scams, dodging sanctions, while only providing a slow, energy intensive payment system. texts enable , at school/work, , devaluation of human labor, all to provide an -damaging, error-prone search

New York Times recently hired Charlie Stadtlander as its spokesperson directly from the NSA where he had served as NSA's head of public affairs theintercept.com/2023/03/07/ne by Jon Schwarz

@erikbtoots @matthew when I watched the video, it had the time of day, rather than the time in the video. So 14:00 means around 2pm the day of the hearing.

@1br0wn @eighthave @spikebike I heard it from someone pretty senior in NATO (not an American) at a Chatham Rule event in 2018 or 2019. Apparently they spent years tracking down a leak that turned out to be one unit saving money by using Huawei instead.

@j2bryson @1br0wn @spikebike Ah yes, the aspect would explain it. I wonder how many 0-click Pegasus/etc infections they would have prevented by not mandating a single vendor for mobile devices. Back in 2018, was looking better than in terms of security.

Let's fight chat control!

Congrats to @mullvadnet - you really nail it with your new campaign against client-side scanning! 💪🔒

#privacy #e2ee #encryption #clientsidescanning #chatcontrol

tutanota.com/blog/posts/chat-c

If you tell your friends about Mastodon, you’re technically an ambassador of the federation.

@debacle @rene_mobile @mobian This makes me think of how I used to be excited about working with , now the only exciting thing about it is its market share. As a , I find a lot more exciting these days, despite all its limitations.

@rene_mobile Aspects of the technical structure of magnify this because developers cross-compile and run in emulators/devices. Basically no one is doing Android dev on Android. and at least were very close to the same OS. I switched to and at the same time, around 2009. Back then, was hackable and flexible. We took full advantage of that. Now my feeling is that is focused on for and no longer empowering users 2/2

@rene_mobile is a company, and its users expect to have everything tied into the cloud. Fine if you want that. Before, offered much more developer freedom and flexibility. Now, it feels like it is being locked into the cloud and pushed to prioritize consuming over creating. Same thing with , I used since 1994, and stuck with it unbroken as it became MacOSX and even . and iOS pushed to shift their focus from creating to consuming. 1/

@rene_mobile I haven't touched SAF code in a while now, so I can't remember details. I do clearly remember feeling that this API made it drastically harder to do what I was doing before. And in order to give any kind of consistent UX across the supported versions, I had to have 3 parallel implementations with a number of per-version quirks. Plus it is biased towards pushing to the cloud. For many use cases, local storage still has advantages, including and resilience.

@rene_mobile And also, I think the right solution is to keep the bad apps out, that's what we work to do in . Then users have the freedom to use apps that require flexible access to the external storage to provide their features. The SAF changes felt to me to be a way to cut out apps that do media/app sharing device-to-device, instead of via cloud services. Device-to-device data exchange is very important in places where data plans are expensive and measured in the 100s of MB per month

Show more
image/svg+xml Librem Chat image/svg+xml