• 0 Posts
  • 196 Comments
Joined 9 months ago
cake
Cake day: February 15th, 2025

help-circle


  • What is Linux protecting us from by using passwords?

    I’d argue: from yourself.

    On windows I often spam clicked through dialogues and popups and without thinking got malware or some other unwanted outcome.

    On linux, when asked for a password it takes effort to type, so I have a moment of my lazy brain resisting and asking “do we really need to do that” and it makes the action more conscious and responsible. I cought myself one step from fucking something up multiple times this way.

    I had some viruses and malware on windows, just like you. But I never had them on linux in mt 15 years of daily driving it.


  • Thats fine until it isn’t.

    Remember all the small folk people the government or other powerfull institutions fucked over in unjust ways for a wide range of reasons (sometimes down to personal grudges other times completely random)?

    Yeah, it would be super easy to put some incriminating files on your computers and lock you up for years. Your grandma would be really sad.

    Also on linux you can set everything to passwordless in polkit/sudoers or a blank password - it doesn’t actually force you and I’ve done that where it made sense (not on a PERSONAL computer)




  • HelloRoot@lemy.loltoLinux@lemmy.mlWhy go through the trouble to use Arch?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    I had much more trouble with keeping my debian/ubuntu installs running for years back in the days. And it was always out of date. Whenever there was a bug, I would search for it, see that it was already fixed upstream and be frustrated that I’d only get that fix in half a year. And then after half a year, dist-upgrade borked my whole install and I had to reinstall from scratch. I remember all the lost weekends of fiddling with it and the stress from needing my pc in working order for my job.

    With arch, I’ve broken it a couple times in the first 2 months, while doing my ideal setup. But now I have been on the same install for about 10 years. It survived being cloned to multiple new computers and laptops and just keeps updating and working. Been using it professionally of course. Rarely do I have to do a minor fix. 2024 was kind of bad iirc, there were 3-4 manual interventions I had to do. It took probably 8 hours of maintenance work in total for that year. 2025 was mostly super smooth sailing, iirc I had to do 1 or at most 2 small fixes that took less than 20minutes each.

    But I must say, I’ve set it up in a very deliberate and failsafe way. I can’t guarantee the same result if you do anything different from my setup - software choise and process wise. And I’ve seen pretty bad fuckups on the support forums again and again from other people that do their own approach with arch.

    I guess thats the power of it. It can be molded into very different forms. With Ubuntu you just get spoonfed what canonical cooks for their corpo overlords.


  • mainstream

    is the keyword here. Mainstream is really big.

    They come for the lions share first. You do nothing because you think you’re unaffected. Then later they will come for you. And nobody will do anything for you either.

    Of course, professional criminals like yourself (sarcasm) will find a way to escape the law. But I doubt it’s nice to live on the edge of society like that anyway, being unable to interact with most services.




  • If so, then imo the GPL is still working as intended.

    I guess it depends on the goal the author has. If the goal is to let big companies pay their employees for contributions to open source, then it seems GPL3 is not the right license. Which is also the reason why Linux is licensed under GPL2 btw.

    If the goal is to make companies avoid contributing and then copy it while claiming they did proper clean-room design (lets be honest, it happens all the time and rarely does anybody hear of it or bring it to court) … then yeah it works as intended.


  • HelloRoot@lemy.loltoOpen Source@lemmy.mlMy thoughts on GPL vs. permissive licenses
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    More like, neighbour invites everybody to their pool, but if you go, you have to sign a legal agreement that you invite everybody to your whole house.

    Of course I wouldn’t go if I don’t want everybody in my house - so I can just build a pool myself and use that.

    At no point was I ever mad or appaled by the neighbours decision (nor did I insinuate that in my comment above). The neighbour is allowed to put any condition on the pool visit that they want to. But this is a discussion about whether such condition is beneficial to the pool owner or not and in what ways.

    It has pros and cons and is not as onesided as you claim.



  • I can tell you about a project I was working on at a previous job.

    There were open source kicad files for a thing we needed. We wanted to modify it slightly and then include it in our finished product and also offer it individually for tinkerers or as a replacement part. But they were licensed under GPL3.

    Because of the license, instead of contributing some improvements to the existing prpject, our engineers were instructed to just look at it and learn from it and then do a completely new internal project from scratch. They were told to make sure it could not be detected as a derivative and never use the existing files. And then to include our planned improvements. Just so that we could avoid licensing it as GPL3 and were free to do it however we wanted.

    So the end result is, a new proprietary thing got created, the company got money, the customers don’t get the source, the existing open source project got no contributions, even though it got exploited in a sense. There were other MIT licensed (and other licenses) projects where we have just contributed instead.

    Don’t ask me why exactly the management/legal was so against GPL3. I’m not really into understanding it deeply, but my takeaway from this is similar to OP.




  • I’m pretty sure if your metadata is correct you can enable the album year collumn and when applying a new sorting, it doesn’t touch the previous one.

    So for example if you sort alphabetically first, then album year, it would be “grouped” by album year and inside each group it would be alphabetical. I say group because it could be that two albums released in the same year.




  • I don’t have a good memory, because it was about 15-10 years ago.

    I remember one time where the dist upgrade finished, but after a reboot most apps would crash with core dumps and I wasn’t able to use apt for anything.

    One time I did the dist upgrade too late and the repos were gone. It would have probably worked by manually pointing at the archive, but I was a newbie back then.

    One time I had some ppa for work, that blocked the upgrade and I would have to completely remove it, but there was no version for the new release yet, even though I needed (also for work) a feature from some tool that was updated in the new release. So I was stuck between having one or the other but not both.

    But like I said, it’s all cloudy.