Debian Testing. It isn’t “recommended” but it works fine.

Obviously if you want AUR you need an Arch variant, in which case just pick Arch.

Edit: I needed the why, it’s up to date enough for me and I know apt well.

If Notepad is getting AI text editing then it’s as good as dead too.

I have no way to put this gently: I cannot conclusively determine which one is more secure.

That’s the only conclusion I would have trusted. Otherwise you should have been awarded the tech equivalent of a Nobel Prize.

Security (and privacy) is not a zero sum game. That isn’t to say we shouldn’t discuss it. That isn’t to say we can’t point out clear advantages.

In any case, I appreciate the write up.

The article we’re talking about?

Those dropped from the maintainer list

404s for me as well but im guessing https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/01/convicted-murderer-filesystem-creator-writes-of-regrets-to-linux-list covers it.

Assuming I accept your premise, the premise of the article is that the actions are not being done by the company.

The key point is that Musk is at fault, not his company.

You can’t just hide behind “the company” and do whatever you want.

At some point, as the EU is discussing, the individual is at fault.

So a company provides infinite protection?

“I didn’t murder that man, the company did.”

“The company paid individual X to murder them, not me.”

No, that’s ridiculous.

There is a line you can cross. Musk has crossed that line. Is it exactly written, if your name is Elon Musk and you own companies X, Y, & Z, and you perform actions A, B, C, you I’ll be fined in this exact way? No. There is a grey area, and a group within the EU is allowed to make a more specific determination.

And do you know who agreed to these rules? Elon Musk. He chose to do business in the EU. He agreed to their rules.

Actions you don’t like aren’t corrupt.

Actions Elon doesn’t like aren’t corrupt.

In fact arguably Elon is the corrupt individual in this case and the EU is simply applying the law to the corrupt individual.

But who determines

How about a governing body with systems of checks and balances? You’re pretending that laws are just out there enforcing themselves. The EU isn’t just some dude with a vendetta. It’s a large collection of people making decisions.

And in fact as a business, in order to do business in the EU, you’ve agreed that the EU has the ability to make decisions like this.

To clarify the cost of creating an LLC is a hundred bucks more or less depending on the jurisdiction. So Elon should be allowed to create “Musk Corp Oct2024 LLC” and then say or do anything under the guise of Musk Corp Oct2024 LLC, then if he’s sued or fined just declare bankruptcy and create “Musk Corp Nov2024 LLC” and do whatever he wants?

At some point you have to recognize the individual is at fault. You can’t just hide behind “Oh that wasn’t me, that was the company” or " That was Musk of SpaceX having an opinion of Musk of Tesla, they are different entities."

If someone is attempting to be genuine and truthful when it comes to personal statements, fine, we can consider the protections. But if someone is flagrant and malicious then those protections no longer apply.

Re Google Safe Browsing

I would argue it’s a security feature with potential privacy concerns, however I would agree it is more of a failsafe or suggestion.

However it being disabled by default or not included at compile time versus enabled by default may also be relevant when it comes to security. As a hypothetical a high severity bug with Google Safe Browsing could arguably make a browser less secure. However even as a failsafe/suggestion, the small security benefit may make the overall browser more secure, e.g. filtering known bad websites that attack known vulnerabilities.

I’m also just using Safe Browsing as an example here, it may or may not be worth focusing on since a browser is basically an operating system.

You mentioned sandboxing, which I think is perhaps a more reasonable scope.

1. Do you have your current list of sources? You mentioned you want more, but where are you looking to start? For example are you looking at the CVE database? Are you looking at competitions like Pwn2Own? Or detailed project group like Google Project Zero?
2. Is it fair to compare Chromium, which is not an end user product, to Firefox which is? Do you plan to look at or compare forks of the software? As an example both Google Chrome and Mozilla Firefox enable “Google Safe Browsing” by default, however the fork “ungoogled-chromium” does not include “Google Safe Browsing” (and they provide their reasoning).

Think of it as an iceberg & Chrome users as a boat.

Assuming no changes, this is landing in Chrome Canary now, so we’re watching the Chrome Canary boat hit the iceberg. The Chrome Beta boat is going to hit in a few weeks. Finally the Chrome Stable boat is scheduled to hit in mid November.

Now Google may choose to hold back actually enabling this flag immediately. It wouldn’t be the first delay. But likely in mid November is when all the posts will start to appear of people asking where their ad blocker went.

(Although I’m guessing it actually is delayed until after the holidays and in the new year, but that’s just wild speculation.)

Sure, but it’s also like, if you’re stepping away from your laptop for a few minutes should you lock the screen or shut it down completely.

The most secure option is to shut it down completely, but also it’s fine to just lock your screen.

If you’ve already got a VPN and it’s as easy as locking your screen to enable, go for it, use it. But if you don’t, you don’t need to go out and get one. You’ll generally be ok without one.

Do you feel the same way about Mastadon?

Yes.

I’m not sure that’s my reason, but I’ve never understood Twitter/Mastodon. It’s just shouting into a void.

The article mentions that the fine will stand and likely be doubled, but I feel like for arguments that are especially stupid, like this one, it should be doubled again.

There are enough corporate loopholes as it is, I can only imagine the chaos if this were allowed.

On the one hand I agree, but also just because it can be fixed over the air doesn’t mean it’s not a major problem.

Plus imagine if a car manufacturer put VERY shitty software into their cars. If a manufacturer has 100 recalls a year, I want to know why. If they have 1, I want to know why.

Just because they are more easily fixed, doesn’t mean the recall isn’t important.

Is my $5 down preorder still valid?