subject:"Re\: \[Trisquel\-users\] family privacy Again"

Is there an actual question I have to answer or are you just telling me  
things?

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

I will try to explain again and give you the benefit of the doubt once,  
although I suspect it may just extend this conversation into the indefinite  
future.


What do you mean by ensuring security? Who is your oponent? What is the  
threat? What are you trying to achieve?


I will divide this into two separate sections:

[1] *Regular Joe*

If I stop running Windows, format my harddrive, install Trisquel, and start  
using Trisquel, can I not reasonably assume that Microsfot is now unable to  
perform whatever abuses they used to be able to perform through their  
proprietary operating system? Does that not apply to every other program?


Free software allows you to do your computing in freedom, by ensuring you  
have four basic freedoms. These freedoms allow you to run the program as you  
wish, to share it, to study how it works and change it, to share your changes  
so others can benefit from them. These freedoms DO NOT guarantee that a  
program will not be abusive or violate your privacy, etc., but it gives you  
and others the possibility to detect it and to defend yourselves against  
this. You, and all other users, can have control of the program.


I hope so far I have been clear. It is not an all or nothing deal. Assuming  
that your system is potentially unsafe against an unknown adversary through  
specter or meltdown or whatever else, is unrelated to whether you have an  
abusive relationship with Microsoft through the Windows OS (in my example).  
Likewise, I can easily stop most other owners of proprietary programs from  
abusing me.



[2] *International Man of Mystery Joe*

By the sounds of it, you are trying to protect yourself against some sort of  
powerful state actor. Further, you seem to believe this powerful oponent is  
out to get YOU, targeting you specifically. Either this or you assume somehow  
that this powerful oponent is somehow simultaneously exploiting all computer  
users through spectre or meltdown or ME, or everything at once (??).


If you're worry is that you are being targetted by your local intelligence  
agency or the NSA or something like that, really, my advise is to minimize  
your use of computers for whatever it is that you want to keep private.  
Further, I would speculate that operational security is much more important  
than whether you've run ME cleaner on your computer (though I suppose it  
wouldn't hurt either).


My guess is the Trisquel forum is not the ideal place to find a thorough  
knowledge to evade such an adversary.





*Conclusion*

While I'll give you the benefit of the doubt as stated in point #2 (What do I  
know, maybe you're Edward Snowden, though I hope not), for any other security  
concern, you should really develop a threat model and mitigate against that.


There is no perfect security.
There is no total privacy.
There is no way to simultaneously defend yourself against all possible  
threats all of the time and lead a functional life.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

You assign a belief to someone who rejects trust, authority and belief and  
who tests. And you call him dogmatic based on that just because you like to  
praise N specific people.


You also seem to make no difference between disrespectful and not kneeling  
down.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again


You messed up so much in your attempt to be derogatory.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

You assign a belief to someone who rejects trust, authority and belief and  
who tests. And you call him dogmatic based on that just because you like to  
praise N specific people.


You also seem to make no difference between disrespectful and not kneeling  
down.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

I am not here to prove anything to you. You simply refuse to understand that  
security has levels and ensuring security through free software is  
meaningless when your hardware is a malware. Being repeatedly cynical won't  
make you understand.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

You prove my point. You keep moving the goal post and demand impossible  
perfection.


You make it seem that using free software is useless and quaint, which it is  
not, and that achieveing some amount of privacy or security is useless  
because other aspects of computing are flawed. I find these false dichotomies  
counter-productive and wasteful.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again


Edit: Mistakenly wrote "can" instead of "cannot."

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

>  would not. I would probably use some 'degoogled' (if that's even possible)  
chromium.


I already explained what I meant by that  
(https://trisquel.info/en/forum/family-privacy-again#comment-127677). But  
yes, I wouldn't have expected less from you.


> Why would you say so?

Heyjoe is dogmatic* in his belief that a program can be free software and  
simultaneously disrespect user privacy, as can be read in the very long "Web  
Browsers" thread. Several people have patiently explained to him why this is  
not the case. In case you don't have all weekend to read, I will provide you  
the first shortcut: https://trisquel.info/en/forum/web-browser#comment-126105


Moglen has been wrong about other predictions and is not infallible. Heyjoe  
is disrespectful of him, as he was of Magic Banana and others (in my opinion  
of course. You need not agree).


* In the pejorative sense, dogma refers to enforced decisions, such as those  
of aggressive political interests or authorities.[4][5] More generally it is  
applied to some strong belief that the ones adhering to it are not willing to  
rationally discuss.


From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogmatic

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-02-08 Thread cmsmycastle


to mason ;;; i did what you're sayin'. -- cms

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again


> Be good to each other (and send me bitcoins) \o/

:)

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again


Learning to speak your language, so hopefully you understand better.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-02-08 Thread greatgnu

> Firefox is free software. If it had not been for Firefox we would probably  
all be using Microsoft's browser by now.


I would not. I would probably use some 'degoogled' (if that's even possible)  
chromium.


>Firefox is far from perfect, but you seem to have a dogmatic and visceral  
hate for it


Why would you say so? Being suspicious and 'testing the browser' to actually  
see what it does and what connections does it establish in the background has  
nothing to do with 'dogma'. Believing blindly FF is good for your privacy is  
actually what I would define 'dogmatic'


Just saying.. But yeah, Moglen is a king. But then again that does not mean  
he can not say or write an inaccuracy.


Be good to each other (and send me bitcoins) \o/

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-02-08 Thread shiretoko


> Don't advise about things which you have not tried.

I did sed replace with a lot of source code a lot of times. There was never  
any problem whatsoever, and you obviously cannot provide any reason why it  
should not be feasable.


> 1) Learn practically

One reply earlier you told me not to instruct you and now you're doing it  
yourself.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

What's the point of discussing the *belief* of someone, especially  
considering that it obviously is dated and does not reflect the current state  
of things? If I tell you "yes, it is plausible" or "no, it is not plausible"  
- what value has that?

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

Libreboot does not remove replace proprietary firmware all chips. You still  
have proprietary microcode for the CPU for example. So using a libreboot  
machine doesn't change things much. Also a libreboot machine suggest that you  
use a fairly old hardware. Oh... and libreboot does not fix the major  
hardware bug of Spectre and Meltdown.


FWIW I have 2 old machines (pre-Intel ME) which I would be happy to put  
libreboot on but unfortunately the MB's are not in the list of supported  
hardware and I have no clue if they will ever be. So it is pretty much a  
mission impossible.


> his strategy is to argue by demanding impossible perfection.

There are simple technical facts (non-free things) which you cannot eradicate  
by free software enthusiasm. I wonder why you are so stubborn and unwilling  
to understand it. I wish there was a perfectly clean and free computer but  
such thing doesn't exists for the moment.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-02-08 Thread sophoclestechnologies

My question, which was directed to mason (but, of course, I encourage anyone  
to respond to it), seems to have been ignored. Eben Moglen, a prominent  
figure of the free software movement, believes that by 2022 Facebook will  
have reached its peak and would henceforth start to decline. Given the very  
significant dangers and issues raised by mason and others about Facebook's  
capabilities, do you think that EB's statement is plausible?

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again


Thanks Adfeno.

Then I would suggest to Joe to use a librebooted computer. I am sure then he  
will find some other reason why free software is irrelevant as it seems his  
strategy is to argue by demanding impossible perfection.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

> You literally wrote:

Ok. Maybe I should have been more explicit by saying "He seems to assume that  
free software PER SE gives him privacy..."

Is that clear now?

> Why not?

Try it and you will see. Don't advise about things which you have not tried.  
1) Learn practically 2) Share, not 1) Criticize 2) Advise theoretically. I  
may be wrong, you may be right. You may find something better. I am ok with  
that. In fact - I would welcome it.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

> Not sure what you mean by ring 3. First time I hear that term. If you

He refers to the issue of MINIX's existance in ring -3 sector of all
computers with Intel Management Engine ([1]).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MINIX#MINIX_3 . See the last paragraph
of that section and the references it points to.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-02-08 Thread shiretoko

> I have never said that.

You literally wrote:
"He seems to assume that free software gives him privacy which is rather  
superficial considering the issues mentioned in this thread"

> FWIW I have already looked at that option but it is not that simple (sed  
replacement).

Why not?
The data is stored in the source code. What should you prevent from simply  
replacing it?

Try the same thing with proprietary software...

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

> saw that the file it downloaded is with date from 2016, so I guess it
> takes care of that.

See the "description" field in the .info.json file, it's the field that
mostly appears in every attempt to download videos using avideo or
youtube-dl. There is a field which also tells the upload date, but it
rarely appears when writing the .info.json file in the first few
tries. From the "description" field one can see that the interview is
from 2012.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again


> There again you come with this "free software can't give you privacy" bs...

I have never said that. Before telling another he talks "bs" you should  
understand what he says. What I have explained previously is that just  
because a program is released as free software is not a guarantee that it  
respects your privacy.


> Do the following:

Right now or immediately?

Don't instruct me, please. If you want to do something - you can do it and  
share the result with others. FWIW I have already looked at that option but  
it is not that simple (sed replacement).


> Free Software DOES give you control, and control enables you to get  
privacy.


Yes, if you have an extra 100 man years to inspect millions of lines of code  
and a freeze of whole human history for that period of time. And that's the  
whole point - that just because it is possible doesn't mean it is feasible.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-02-08 Thread shiretoko


There again you come with this "free software can't give you privacy" bs...
yeah you did a tcpdump and found some background chatting, which is not nice,  
that's true.

Do the following:
1. download the source code of firefox
2. do a sed replace for every unwanted URL firefox is communicating with and  
substitute it with "localhost"

3. compile firefox

=> you solved the problem for yourself

4. release your changes to the public

=> you solved the problem for everybody else

Free Software DOES give you control, and control enables you to get privacy.  
Actually you proved it yourself but didn't realize it.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

Thanks Adfeno. From reference [1] I conclude the problem is Debian is not on  
the list of FSF endorsed distributions. Freedombox is composed of free  
software as far as I can see. Debian without non-free repositories is free  
software too. Given there is no alternative that is more freedom respecting  
than Freedombox for a plug server, I do not see how it would be unethical for  
me to recommend it. I even wonder if it could be setup on Trisquel (not sure  
if all the dependencies are in the Trisquel repos). The conclusion though is  
Freedombox can be run without proprietary software. Is this correct?

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

You conflate free software, privacy and security. You also do not (or refuse  
to) understand that one program can be free even if others are not and we can  
still speak about the software freedom of that program.


I do not need to look at any other context to say that a program is free  
software, and I have yet to come across a case where I have a choice between  
a free and proprietary program and I did not choose the free one. It is  
exactly the same case with firmware: whenever I can use free firmware, I do.


If you look at browser market shares, back when IE had >75% of the market,  
Opera had something like 0.1%. That's what I meant by we would probably all  
be using Microsoft's browser. In any case, I am very thankful that Firefox  
and its derivatives exist.


Not sure what you mean by ring 3. First time I hear that term. If you mean  
freedom 3, I don't understand what "when the system is compromised at freedom  
3 is nonsense." Without freedom 3, you cannot improve the program and share  
your improvements.


What authority do I pat in the back?

I don't have the time for silly arguments.

A large number of your posts over the past weeks seem to contradict that  
statement.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

Thanks for sharing the links. I will look at those materials when I have more  
time.


As for avideo: the man page says it does have such option. FWIW I just saw  
that the file it downloaded is with date from 2016, so I guess it takes care  
of that.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

> I didn't look at YouTube. I downloaded with avideo locally.
> So blame the one who shares dated info and asks for feedback based on
> current issues :)

Don't worry, this happens with everyone. ;)

I didn't have time to test this yet because I rarely use YouTube ---
except for getting stuff out as .webm and seeding it using torrent ---
since I'm trying to push back on the set of incumbents described by
Yochai (the person who gave the SFLC Fall 2017 Conference keynote that I
referenced in another message), but does avideo have `--write-info-json'
option? If "yes" then: you can get the upload date from the .info.json
file.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

All forms of proprietary firmware are not a free software either. So talking  
about software freedom at ring 3 when the system is compromised at ring -3 is  
nonsense. And defending such talking shows lack of understanding, ironically  
by a person who blames others for not understanding well enough  
technicalities. You just proved again what I said - that you are here just to  
pat on the back the authority which gives you self confidence and a basis to  
disregard anything else.


> Opera is not free software.

So? Did you see me saying it was? The comment was about your:

> If it had not been for Firefox we would probably all be using Microsoft's  
browser by now.


which implies that if it was not Firefox there would be only Microsoft  
browser. Looking at chronology of events has nothing to do with software  
freedom. Hello?


> You seem to live in a completely binary world

Again: look who's talking. When some software is mentioned you immediately  
jump to that "free" or "non-free" without even looking at any context.



One last time: my reply was to Aristophanes and again this is way off-topic,  
even to the sub-thread you are replying to. I don't have the time for silly  
arguments.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

For those which reported missing references for the message I'm replying
to (my own one), here is the references. Now they should appear normally
for those reading using the forums.

[1] https://downloads.softwarefreedom.org/2017/conference/0-keynote.webm
. According to https://softwarefreedom.org/events/2017/conference/video/
, it's under CC BY-SA 3.0 US.

[2]
https://media.libreplanet.org/u/libreplanet/m/the-free-software-movement-in-the-age-of-trump/
(under CC BY-SA 4.0).

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

For those which reported missing references for the message I'm replying
to (my own one), here is the references. Now they should appear normally
for those reading using the forums.

[1]
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/freedombox-discuss/2017-April/007982.html
.

[2] https://www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/ .

[3] https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/IceCat .

-- 
- https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno
- Palestrante e consultor sobre /software/ livre (não confundir com
  gratis).
- "WhatsApp"? Ele não é livre. Por favor, veja formas de se comunicar
  instantaneamente comigo no endereço abaixo.
- Contato: https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno#vCard
- Arquivos comuns aceitos (apenas sem DRM): Corel Draw, Microsoft
  Office, MP3, MP4, WMA, WMV.
- Arquivos comuns aceitos e enviados: CSV, GNU Dia, GNU Emacs Org, GNU
  GIMP, Inkscape SVG, JPG, LibreOffice (padrão ODF), OGG, OPUS, PDF
  (apenas sem DRM), PNG, TXT, WEBM.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again


* Opera is not free software.

* Firefox is not perfect. You seem to live in a completely binary world. What  
satisfies your standards? If nothing, what are you creating that satisfies  
your standards.


* I can see you don't care who Moglen is. I do and I have a problem with you  
calling him a "talker" when he has done much for free software and privacy.


Look who's talking.

* I have spent weeks reading your posts, disparaging people I hold in high  
regard and who have always been helpful with me and others in this forum  
(such as Magic Banana), putting down projects I care about such as free  
software, etc. Against my better judgement, I have lost my patience and have  
been baited by your continued needling.


* I am not belittling what was shared, and quite a few people, Mason and  
Magic Banana among them, were very supportive of your efforts. You had no  
kindness for them either.


* How was I disrespectful to you?

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again


> the upload date was 2012-06-01

I didn't look at YouTube. I downloaded with avideo locally.
So blame the one who shares dated info and asks for feedback based on current  
issues :)


BTW I see no links in your current and previous posts. I think it should be  
better if you put them in the relevant place in text rather. Putting them at  
the end makes it difficult to jump back and forth. After all - we are not  
writing wikipedia here.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again


> however I must note thatit's not a free/libre system distribution,

Wow, I didn't know that. It's a project started and led by Moglen AFAIK. I am  
surprised it is not free software. Your footnotes are missing, do you have a  
link to this information?


> It unfortunately isn't free/libre, due to what is exposed in ([2][3]).

[2] and [3] are unavailable. AFAIK, Firefox source code is free software. You  
are right, the trademark and recommendation of non-free addons make it  
inconvenient to excercise freedom 3, which is why forks exist. In any case,  
my point to Joe was that it is a valuable project, faults nonwithstanding.  
Thanks for the clarification though.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

> "Firefox frees people from a net created by Microsoft"
>
> Yeah, like 

I do agree with you, although it must be noted that the upload date was
2012-06-01, and unless I'm mistaken (please investigate this or correct
me if I'm wrong), back then we were unaware of the freedom issues of
Firefox.

Besides, we had only Microsoft as the major incumbent, in recent years
it has been proven that Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google are also part
of trash. And just last year we found even more --- hint: not just
Netflix but every techonology or service provider that breaks attempts
of federation or that traps customers with non-(free/libre) software ---
([1]).

> He has obviously not explored into uBO and uMatrix and is stuck with ABP.

> Well... CAs are not necessarily trustful OR independent.

> The land of the free :)

Again the issue of date. The Snowden revelations didn't came to exist
back then.

> and he suggest that the teaching should be about asking "the
> question". But the problem with this is that he also seems to teach
> what the answer is which deprives the questioner of the possibility to
> look freely for oneself and to find a different one. He suggests
> existing formulas like Diaspora etc. There is danger in suggesting
> recipes because people easily stick to them and there is no real
> question. So the question must come without an answer, otherwise it is
> an imposition, not a free observation but a directed one.

I agree that we should not always give the definitive answer to
everyone. I don't know if the reference in [2] is aligned with what you
have just said, but in [2] we can see that this decision as to whether
the current "already-made answer" should be given depends on the age of
the person we're talking to.

[1]
. 
According to ,
it's under CC BY-SA 3.0 US.

[2]

(under CC BY-SA 4.0).

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

> * Freedombox, the "plug server" you make reference to, is a real
> project, it works and is being developed.

Yes, Freedombox really exists and has releases, however I must note that
it's not a free/libre system distribution, so we mustn't recommend it
here, and so far I have received no indication of this status changing
([1]).

> * Firefox is free software. If it had not been for Firefox we would

It unfortunately isn't free/libre, due to what is exposed in
([2][3]). And before someone else does: please don't provide
over-simplified description of the work free/libre forks do related to
their non-(free/libre) originals.

[1] 
.

[2] .

[3] .

-- 
- https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno
- Palestrante e consultor sobre /software/ livre (não confundir com
  gratis).
- "WhatsApp"? Ele não é livre. Por favor, veja formas de se comunicar
  instantaneamente comigo no endereço abaixo.
- Contato: https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno#vCard
- Arquivos comuns aceitos (apenas sem DRM): Corel Draw, Microsoft
  Office, MP3, MP4, WMA, WMV.
- Arquivos comuns aceitos e enviados: CSV, GNU Dia, GNU Emacs Org, GNU
  GIMP, Inkscape SVG, JPG, LibreOffice (padrão ODF), OGG, OPUS, PDF
  (apenas sem DRM), PNG, TXT, WEBM.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

I was answering Aristophanes. Did you read anywhere a question "How should I  
spend my time" or "What do I need"?


> If it had not been for Firefox we would probably all be using Microsoft's  
browser by now.


Opera was there before Firefox. (fwiw)

> Firefox is far from perfect, but you seem to have a dogmatic and visceral  
hate for it.


I have shown actual facts proving that Firefox disrespects user privacy by  
default. If facts are a dogma to you there is hardly any point in trying to  
participate in a meaningful discussion (or in any discussion at all). So far  
you have shown nothing but praising authorities.


I don't care who E.M. is and I have never given him personal qualifications  
(as you do all the time here). I commented on the video from my point of view  
- exactly what Aristophanes asked for. If you have a problem when someone  
asks something and another one shares observations - you may better check  
what is the purpose of internet forums.


> You spend your time here talking other people down.

Look who's talking.

> The only thing that came out from that web browser forum was you  
disparaging Magic Banana after he created two scripts to start your supposed  
project.


If you are trying to belittle what was shared, I don't really care. I am  
sharing for those who may be interested, not for some contentious persons who  
troll around like the politicians - patting themselves on the back and  
spitting vitriol at everyone else.


My "high horse" is actual facts. You seem to have nothing to share except  
unsolicited critique and disrespectful personal attacks. So your posts  
neither answer any specific question, nor give any useful information.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again


Too many talkers, too few of them touch the actual essence of the problem.

* Eben Moglen has spent his professional life struggling for privacy and free  
software. Since you seem to dismiss free software at ever turn, you may be  
interested to know that among many many other things, he was Phil  
Zimmermann's defense lawyer.


* Freedombox, the "plug server" you make reference to, is a real project, it  
works and is being developed.


* Firefox is free software. If it had not been for Firefox we would probably  
all be using Microsoft's browser by now. Firefox is far from perfect, but you  
seem to have a dogmatic and visceral hate for it.


* Moglen started his life as a computer programming language designer. He is  
a technically competent person.


* You spend your time here talking other people down.

* You speak of Eben Moglen as if he were some sort of snake oil peddler.

* The only thing that came out from that web browser forum was you  
disparaging Magic Banana after he created two scripts to start your supposed  
project.


* What have you done to place you on this pedestal where you look down on  
everyone else, including those who have dedicated their lives to ensuring we  
have choices in how we do our computing?


* You need to come off your high horse.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

He seems to assume that free software gives him privacy which is rather  
superficial considering the issues mentioned in this thread:


https://trisquel.info/en/forum/freedom-security-technology-what-can-we-do

I also see that his optimism about what he wants makes him oversimplify  
fairly complex technological problems and reduce them to things like "plug  
server".


A few key moments:

5:15
"Firefox frees people from a net created by Microsoft"

Yeah, like 

https://trisquel.info/files/firefox-privacy-policy-2.png

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1432248


22:05
"My telephone calls are secured because they are placed through VPN and free  
software VoIP"


"All my surfing is done through proxies..."

He has obviously not explored into uBO and uMatrix and is stuck with ABP.

"I do HTTPS Everywhere, I never send anything unencrypted"

Well... CAs are not necessarily trustful OR independent.
https://blog.torproject.org/life-without-ca

"My web server is on my private VPN sitting somewhere in North America"

The land of the free :)


28:20
"Those of us who don't do technology must do teaching"

and he suggest that the teaching should be about asking "the question". But  
the problem with this is that he also seems to teach what the answer is which  
deprives the questioner of the possibility to look freely for oneself and to  
find a different one. He suggests existing formulas like Diaspora etc. There  
is danger in suggesting recipes because people easily stick to them and there  
is no real question. So the question must come without an answer, otherwise  
it is an imposition, not a free observation but a directed one.


Too many talkers, too few of them touch the actual essence of the problem.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-02-07 Thread sophoclestechnologies

Eben Moglen believes that 2022 is a good estimation of the maximum length of  
Facebook's lasting, and he seems to have a deep knowledge of the issues in  
hand (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJCczbSF-B8). What is your opinion,  
given the threats/dangers you mention?

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-02-06 Thread Adonay Felipe Nogueira

You can get your copy of GNU Social to be like Facecrap, most
importantly change the character limit to something equal or greater
than 500.

Also you don't need the Raspberry stuff if you are going for a simple
home server, various free/libre system distribution projects use Beagle
Bone Black and other which at least initialize completely with
free/libre software for this stuff, specially because serving a GNU
Social instance doesn't require GPU.

For more information you can also see [1] and [2].

RPi crap is not an option unfortunatelly. :S

Addendum: Thanks for those responsible for Raspberry Pi (and future
versions) for making this thing so difficult for us.

[1] .

[2] .

2018-02-06T06:08:23+0100 s...@vmail.me wrote:
> I tried to install diaspora but the server which is a ra*berry pi (it
> is n ot open hardware i asked in the forums and they CAN NOT release
> the gpu code, and they say it does not have backdoors but who will
> believe that,
>
> eoma68 is too much expensive that I cannot buy locally) not being able
> to handle it (low ram) so I just installed humhub community edition,
> but disasppointed to not find any mobile  apps and I saw a discussion
> that the offcial mobile app will not be free.
>
>  I tried gnu social but I need something that almost mimics book of
> faces, friendica cannot be installed for some reason and no other
> alternatives that I can think of. Thank you for suggesting the
> deleting their accounts @SuperTramp but that would just spark world
> war, they did not remove my face in the post and I am still pissed of
> because of that, in the next family gathering I will refuse to take
> any pictures whatever be the consequences of it.
>

-- 
- https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno
- Palestrante e consultor sobre /software/ livre (não confundir com
  gratis).
- "WhatsApp"? Ele não é livre. Por favor, veja formas de se comunicar
  instantaneamente comigo no endereço abaixo.
- Contato: https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno#vCard
- Arquivos comuns aceitos (apenas sem DRM): Corel Draw, Microsoft
  Office, MP3, MP4, WMA, WMV.
- Arquivos comuns aceitos e enviados: CSV, GNU Dia, GNU Emacs Org, GNU
  GIMP, Inkscape SVG, JPG, LibreOffice (padrão ODF), OGG, OPUS, PDF
  (apenas sem DRM), PNG, TXT, WEBM.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-02-05 Thread sora

I tried to install diaspora but the server which is a ra*berry pi (it is n ot  
open hardware i asked in the forums and they CAN NOT release the gpu code,  
and they say it does not have backdoors but who will believe that,


eoma68 is too much expensive that I cannot buy locally) not being able to  
handle it (low ram) so I just installed humhub community edition, but  
disasppointed to not find any mobile  apps and I saw a discussion that the  
offcial mobile app will not be free.


 I tried gnu social but I need something that almost mimics book of faces,  
friendica cannot be installed for some reason and no other alternatives that  
I can think of. Thank you for suggesting the deleting their accounts  
@SuperTramp but that would just spark world war, they did not remove my face  
in the post and I am still pissed of because of that, in the next family  
gathering I will refuse to take any pictures whatever be the consequences of  
it.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-02-05 Thread greatgnu


always welcome, mate Joe!

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again


Thanks for the links.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

> So I probably shouldn't say that I don't either, but will you tell me how  
when you figure it out?


I think it should be possible to create filter based on mail headers (which  
contain info about the sending server, i.e. you can identify if it is Gmail).


> How are we doing so far?

One of us seems too excited about the presence of the other. :)

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-30 Thread γραφω λογον



On 01/30/2018 01:45 AM, Heyjoe wrote a post that was apparently directed
towards myself, the owner of the "Heather" account on the Trisquel
Community peer-support forums, but I'm probably going to answer very
imperfectly and over time so here goes:


You said:

I don't know how you will filter GSuite email addresses with custom
 domain names


So I probably shouldn't say that I don't either, but will you tell me
how when you figure it out?

Unfortunately, I have a problem with saying things like that. I'll work
on it.

You said: Landline phones are also eavesdropped, regular mail can
 also be unsafe, your pigeon can be caught etc.

So I said: Yeppers. I think they call that "history". Obviously you
don't need a condescending tutorial from a random stranger on the
internet, which is a huge relief because there's a zillion things I'd
rather do today than THAT again.

 I said: why feed the mafia if you don't have to?

So you said: The right question is:

But I don't want to derail akito's thread by saying what I think of
(expletive deleted) suits and ties who want to "volunteer somewhere they
can help the poor" and don't even know that Horatio Alger wrote fiction
and think they have the right to tell me what I'm supposed to think and
feel just because I cared more about the fate of the human race than
wearing a suit and tie to work when I was in college.

You can thank my mates, Supertramp and Mason, for that, not our
moderator, David, who has better things to do with his time than issue
me "warning points" and temporary three day bans, capiche? This isn't
facebook, dude, it's a peer support forum for the Trisquel operating
system.[1]

You said: how do you communicate with people who like to do
it. Will you isolate yourself[2] or will you give in? Or something else?

So I said: Oh, something else, but I'm sure ymmv and other folks here
who make up the collective "we" of the Trisquel boards will be along
shortly with more helpful and relevant answers to your rhetorical question.

I already said: If you have already explained why friends don't let
friends use gmail
and the person isn't listening, is that really someone you want in your
life?

So you said: Are you suggesting that one should remove people from one's
life because
 they use Gmail or Facebook? What if those people are your family? Do you
want them out of your life because they don't conform to your *idea*
 about *serious* life?

So I laughed so hard at myself you wouldn't believe it even if it wasn't
true and felt so grateful for my mates here on the Trisquel community
peer support forums, because this is EXACTLY what Supertramp and Mason
meant when they refused to accept my well-intentioned apology for being
such an idiot sheeple with all the tmi that's still in the Troll Lounge
and expressed their own fears that the owner of the "Heather" account
might actually be more like a canary in a coal mine.

Did you read the old thread that inspired akito to make the original
post on this thread? I'm just curious, because I sure did leave a lot of
bruises to kick on it, didn't I?

Seriously, Joe, no hard feelings about any of this and I'm not even
angry at you, just trying to answer your questions honestly and publicly.

You said:  Such computer simply doesn't exist. Nobody can give you that
service.

So I said: But you are speaking to me in front of people who wish that
they could. I am very protective of them right now and some of them are
very tired from coding an emergency patch for the Spectre/Meltdown
vulnerabilities. Please try to remember that when you address me
specifically or other experienced users on tech forums who do not
actively write software, documentation, or have other normal(ish)
volunteer(ish) part-time job(ish)s.

Nobody can fire me, personally, from the desk job I don't have, take
away property I don't have, or hurt the wife I don't have if I get rid
of my computer and spend that time trying to grow petunias instead.
Please remember that this is not true for people who I, the owner of the
"Heather" account, care about.

 You said: So what will you do?

So I said: The same thing people have always done in similar
circumstances. Most likely no better or no worse than anybody else.

If my family and country abandon me and everybody in my afk world tells
me that I'm less than a cockroach, I am going to love and protect my
developers and fellow free software users because they would be all I
had left. This is not something a Windows user should reasonably be
expected to understand.

I'm putting the footnotes in The Troll Lounge, Joe, since that's where
they belong. I'll edit on the forum when this posts so I can link you.

How are we doing so far?

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-30 Thread greatgnu

>I could not even find the deletion option in Facebook's settings. I had to  
get there from an external link in a support thread.


the very excellent privacytools.io website gives two links (which I post so  
akito can sneak on his memberz_fams backdoored computers and secretely  
"delete" ("delete") their accounts ->


https://www.facebook.com/help/delete_account
http://deletefacebook.com/

>It's clear that they don't want you to delete your account. I wonder if  
there is some legal reason they have to have it as an option at all.



I guess they prefer to sift all your data legally. I guess once you delete  
your account they have to sift it illegally. I guess they feel more  
comfortable knowing they are doing illegal stuff legally, just like their NSA  
colleagues.



Now, I'll take example from Adfeno the boss and pretend I am posting this  
through the mailing lisztdts so I can leave some nice addendum in a very  
casual and random manner..


--
- Encrypt it All so they can Know Shit
- free is not gratis, it's better
- "WhatsApp"? The coppers use it daily, Need I say more?
- Once any bit or byte leaves your computer and enters teh Internet you  
should assume it will always be everywhere, forever. Your assumption will  
prove itself true, give it time.

- contact me: don't
- If you think data brokers will just hand you legal tools to actually  
protect or amend you present, past or future privacy, you need to be checked.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

I am not enforcing rights on anyone. I am just pointing out the fact that on  
the other side of the wire there is a compromised system which cannot be  
trusted and that by securing just one node in a network doesn't give security  
of communication as long as the other nodes are not secure.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again


And that removes Intel ME and proprietary firmware? Or Spectre?

You see - you are still thinking in terms of *I* and *me* although I  
explained that on the other side of the wire there are millions affected by  
those systems. It is beyond your resources, beyond your little libre system.  
I don't know if you really understand the depth of the whole issue.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-30 Thread Adonay Felipe Nogueira

I would remove their contact resources/forms/ways that are not
*federated* (this is a little beyond free/libre software as a product,
and is very important, see: [1], it belongs to a subset of the
free/libre software as philosophy).

Email is, at least by design, federated, so you don't need to remove
their emails.

Besides, it's possible to do such split by sender address. Email clients
which support "splitting" and "scoring" allow you to do this. For
example, Gnus, the email and news client that comes installed with GNU
Emacs by default. I don't particularly use it because I don't receive
emails from the "big players" that frequently, at least not directly,
just through discussion/mailing lists.

[1] https://libreplanet.org/wiki/XMPP#Why_should_you_use_it.3F .

2018-01-30T10:45:16+0100 stu...@anchev.net wrote:
> I don't know how you will filter GSuite email addresses with custom
> domain names but even if we suppose it is technically possible, the
> person on the other side of the wire will still expect an email reply,
> not a pigeon. Landline phones are also eavesdropped, regular mail can
> also be unsafe, your pigeon can be caught etc.
>
>
> The right question is: how do you communicate with people who like to
> do it. Will you isolate yourself or will you give in? Or something
> else?
>
>
> Are you suggesting that one should remove people from one's life
> because they use Gmail or Facebook? What if those people are your
> family? Do you want them out of your life because they don't conform
> to your *idea* about *serious* life?
>
> And again: if you don't use Gmail but say - another service, non
> PRISM. There is no service provider which will guarantee you that
> their computers don't have Intel ME, that they run only libreboot, and
> that there is no proprietary firmware on any chip. Such computer
> simply doesn't exist. Nobody can give you that service.
>
> So what will you do?

-- 
- https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno
- Palestrante e consultor sobre /software/ livre (não confundir com
  gratis).
- "WhatsApp"? Ele não é livre. Por favor, veja formas de se comunicar
  instantaneamente comigo no endereço abaixo.
- Contato: https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno#vCard
- Arquivos comuns aceitos (apenas sem DRM): Corel Draw, Microsoft
  Office, MP3, MP4, WMA, WMV.
- Arquivos comuns aceitos e enviados: CSV, GNU Dia, GNU Emacs Org, GNU
  GIMP, Inkscape SVG, JPG, LibreOffice (padrão ODF), OGG, OPUS, PDF
  (apenas sem DRM), PNG, TXT, WEBM.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

> But you can still have your email program filter out all @gmail addresses,  
send them to a special folder, and decide whether to reply by landline  
telephone, postage stamp, or passenger pigeon instead of email.


I don't know how you will filter GSuite email addresses with custom domain  
names but even if we suppose it is technically possible, the person on the  
other side of the wire will still expect an email reply, not a pigeon.  
Landline phones are also eavesdropped, regular mail can also be unsafe, your  
pigeon can be caught etc.


> why feed the mafia if you don't have to?

The right question is: how do you communicate with people who like to do it.  
Will you isolate yourself or will you give in? Or something else?


> If you have already explained why friends don't let friends use gmail and  
the person isn't listening, is that really someone you want in your life?


Are you suggesting that one should remove people from one's life because they  
use Gmail or Facebook? What if those people are your family? Do you want them  
out of your life because they don't conform to your *idea* about *serious*  
life?


And again: if you don't use Gmail but say - another service, non PRISM. There  
is no service provider which will guarantee you that their computers don't  
have Intel ME, that they run only libreboot, and that there is no proprietary  
firmware on any chip. Such computer simply doesn't exist. Nobody can give you  
that service.


So what will you do?

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon

Perfect analogy.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-29 Thread i_write_words

But you can still have your email program filter out all @gmail addresses,  
send them to a special folder, and decide whether to reply by landline  
telephone, postage stamp, or passenger pigeon instead of email.


Of course that won't work for your employer or your ex-wife, but why feed the  
mafia if you don't have to?


If you have already explained why friends don't let friends use gmail and the  
person isn't listening, is that really someone you want in your life?


Maybe they weren't really serious about keeping in touch with you in the  
first place.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

> unless of course the other person uses Gmail in which case it doesn't  
matter


That is the actual case I am talking about. You may have the perfect free,  
clean hardware and software, not use any spying services etc. but you have to  
communicate with others and others are inside a corrupt system. One person or  
10k people is nothing. Isolation solves nothing.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-29 Thread i_write_words


Yep.

And let's not forget prevention of family members, as imperfect as our  
current technology may be.


/Heather of the Trisquel Boards

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

> He explained that he
> deactivated his account

Both deletion (no more account) and deactivation (the account sits waiting for 
you to come back) are available, but Facebook goes out of their way to lead 
people to deactivate rather than delete. I could not even find the deletion 
option in Facebook's settings. I had to get there from an external link in a 
support thread. In addition to making it hard to learn of the deletion option, 
they are vague about the details of the deactivation option. It's clear that 
they don't want you to delete your account. I wonder if there is some legal 
reason they have to have it as an option at all.

> Personally I am still thinking how to properly get out of FB. I still have
> some people there who insist to remain stupid and to communicate only
> through FB. They would never check their emails any more.

Shortly before I deleted my account entirely, my only usage of Facebook was to 
log in once a week and respond to the messages sent to me through Facebook even 
though I had told friends that it was not my preferred mode of communication. 
It turned out to be quite easy to get them to stop. I deleted my account, and 
they were forced to contact me by email or text (received by me via XMPP). That 
would not have worked if they had instead reacted by never contacting me at 
all. Fortunately they are better friends than that. Everyone's situation is 
different, though, and Facebook has a lot of power, so just deleting the 
account might not be an option for everyone.

> Same
> with Gmail, Youtube and what not.

Gmail was a little easier to get away from. My old Gmail address forwards 
everything to my new one, and I respond via the new one. Gmail will see these 
incoming messages until people gradually learn my new email address, but does 
not see my responses or the rest of the conversation... unless of course the 
other person uses Gmail in which case it doesn't matter, but its better than a 
situation like Facebook where we can't even communicate without using the same 
platform.

YouTube, for me at least, has been the trickiest to avoid. Before I came to my 
senses, I let myself come to rely on YouTube to access music, which is 
particularly bad because I'm a musician. I now avoid youtube.com and only 
access YouTube through avideo and youtube-viewer, but those don't work on 
videos with DRM (the number of which seems to be increasing) and does not solve 
the larger problem of my depending on Google to access information.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-29 Thread greatgnu


>old data was there

Which reminds of Binney when he says that metadata dousn't need that much  
space, even the metadata of the entire world, to get stored. Why do you think  
they keep building more and more of these monsters? Their motto is 'collect  
it ALL, so we can know it ALL'. I bet my ass all data is perpetually stored,  
for ever. God, after all, needs to know everything, even the most  
insignificant details. Nothing is really insignificant btw.



**monsters

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-29 Thread greatgnu

/me hands the solution for family member outrageous privacy disrespect to  
akito



**solution (use it wisely)

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

> Because it is stupid and futile.

Yes, we should not have to give up our dignity to void being surveilled, and 
I'm not convinced it would work anyway.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-29 Thread γραφω λογον

Of course, but we all did it anyway. I had to rat out one of my own kids
with the facial recognition software because mine had been "temporarily
disabled" for so long that I didn't have a clue who any of the other
"friends" they wanted me to identify even were.

Mason, you write from a deeper place than what can be exploited for
money. Keep up the good work--you are so much more than a "suit and tie".

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

Yesterday I watched a recent video by Lunduke. He explained that he  
deactivated his account long ago, asked several times for confirmation that  
everything was deleted and received only replies from some people forwarding  
him to other people. In the end he was told that this cannot be confirmed.  
Many months later he created a brand new account with the same email address  
as before which was obviously possible as if this email address was never  
used before. And surprise: upon first login all his old data was there.  
Additionally there were 2 new fresh friend requests pending (which had  
arrived during the time while the account was supposedly completely inactive  
an invisible).


Personally I am still thinking how to properly get out of FB. I still have  
some people there who insist to remain stupid and to communicate only through  
FB. They would never check their emails any more. That's why I say - removing  
one person doesn't change anything. It is not that simple. Same with Gmail,  
Youtube and what not.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

> You cannot remove anything from Facebook. It is never deleted, even after
> the account is deactivated. It will stay on FB's servers and be used for all
> kinds of things like facial recognition, machine learning etc.

When I finally smartened up and deleted my account Facebook claimed that my 
data would be deleted from their servers in 14 days. I'm certain this was a lie.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-29 Thread i_write_words

I don't know if it is a solution for every day, but since Akito is a minor I
would definitely want him to use this or a mardi gras mask if he were a
family member or someone else I cared about enough to want try to protect.

It has seriously gotten so bad that minors are routinely photographed at
public events without their own or their parents' permission and then told
(not asked) that the video of the cute/talented kid has been uploaded to the
stranger's Facebook or YouTube accounts.

How does Akito know that his picture won't be turned into a meme and
ridiculed? I know mine probably has because of facial deformities
and...wellsuffice it to say
https://www.streetsensemedia.org/article/dental-medicaid-mary-otto-teeth-book-deamonte-driver/
and bla bla bla everybody's got problems.

Things are not normal. The adults in Akito's life should be protecting him,
not something he needs to protect himself from.

Akito, I regret my overly cheerful and optimistic posts in the old thread
that youread. I wish I had answers for you.

I am currently estranged from former self-taught hacker father,
Griselda-Beatriz, and another daughter who does not have silly "internet
euphemism name".

"Clown" and "Too stupid to figure out how to bat at pictures" are masks
iIfrequently wear in offline life as well as "too irresponsible to be trusted
with yet another cell phone" and "never has been good for anything but
spending (survivor against all odds of chemical addiction during kids' entire
childhood and therefore unable to pay child support so i never actually had
any access to my) ex-husband's money".

I had some words of courage for you cherry picked from various works of
English literature but they are on my other computer and there are only 24
hours in a day and less than five more years in my own statistically probable
life expectancy. If you don't enjoy English literature, I'm sure there are
equally worthy works in your own language.

You are very brave.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-29 Thread pierrefalek

The only stupidity is not taking advantage of what people can imagine to face  
something : face recognition for this example.


Akito has been pictured during a party and this picture have been posted on  
Facebook without his conscent. Right ?
It could have been anyone. I'm not someone special to give him advices for  
his own life.

Having a real trouble with his family is awful. I know this situation.

It would not cause any problem for me because I'm a funny person and I have  
self derision.
And it would not be a problem for anyone who is taking pictures because it  
can be sort of a game with digital cameras with face recognition options.
People are always talking about the party when it's over. And maybe they can  
think about face recognition with digital cameras and applications.

A party is made to be enjoyed. Not to talk about serious things.
Spoiling it by hammering arguments against my family and friends is  
unproductive.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again


> Why not have a try ?

Because it is stupid and futile.

You see - all this pattern of thinking about the ultimate entertainment,  
security through isolation, being a king etc. is the root of the problems we  
are facing. Yet man thinks he can escape from all this with more  
entertainment and stronger control over non-entertainment. It is impossible.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-29 Thread pierrefalek


Well, I don't think mass surveillance is a joke.

This article is actually quite serious and face recognison is used  
everywhere, even in the steets. Not only on Facebook.


I'm an funny person.
Making a surprise to the family and friends who are using a lot Facebook for  
trying this method can allow him to create a real event in a party for fun.  
He can create his own mask. Try some others. He can be the king of the party  
!
If it's really working, he can enjoy the party and not be afraid to be  
pictured.

Why not have a try ?

I've been pictured on Facebook twice recently. But this was within the  
context of my associative participations who are public. This is not my  
private life.
I only regret I have to do this for people to come because a lot of persons  
follows us on Facebook.


Being pictured in private is something more problematic.

Concerning our friend Akito, I think this is more a family/friend problem  
where I shouldn't interfere, but I have confidence in him to think and to  
react as a responsible adult by choosing the better solution for him and his  
family/friends concerning his presence on Facebook.


Again, making a parallel between working time and facebook time is a much  
more effctive argument to people for giving up Facebook.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-29 Thread sora

> You cannot remove anything from Facebook. It is never deleted, even after  
the account is deactivated. It will stay on FB's servers and be used for all  
kinds of things like facial recognition, machine learning etc.

I agree

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

I don't think it is very sane to turn oneself into a clown or damage one's  
vision with deliberate obstructions. This won't remove mass surveillance.  
Remember that when you send an email the chance that on the other side of the  
wire there is a PRISMed system (Gmail, Yahoo etc) is huge.


Did you know they are developing drones which are as big as a fly and can't  
be distinguished? The other day it was on NatGeo. There are working  
prototypes.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-29 Thread pierrefalek


https://cvdazzle.com/

A solution for everyday ?

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again


> I have not read the idea of panopticon.

Do it.

> Are you suggesting to hide in plain sight idea?

I am not suggesting anything along the lines of "do this" or "don't do that".  
It is important to see things for oneself and from that comes clarity and  
right action.


> So I convinced them to remove some of my pictures but they did not remove  
it entirely it still shows my face and facebook's facial recognition is what  
I or everyone should fear.


You cannot remove anything from Facebook. It is never deleted, even after the  
account is deactivated. It will stay on FB's servers and be used for all  
kinds of things like facial recognition, machine learning etc.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-29 Thread sora

I have not read the idea of panopticon. Are you suggesting to hide in plain  
sight idea? So I convinced them to remove some of my pictures but they did  
not remove it entirely it still shows my face and facebook's facial  
recognition is what I or everyone should fear.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-28 Thread studio

There are surveillance cameras even when you walk outdoors or drive your car.  
There are also satellites which take pictures from above all the time and  
send it to the governments. Is the solution to hide?


Modifying one's behavior because of all that will not change anything, it  
will even make things worse. Even Snowden said that. That is the whole idea  
of the panopticon - to feel controlled all the time and fear that.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon

Remember also that extreme avoidance of what the crowd does creates a much  
stronger fingerprint of yourself. Not that I am suggesting that you give in  
but be aware of all that. Running away has never sold any human problems, it  
has always made them worse. We need something much bigger and much more  
radical than simply not using this or that website.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-28 Thread sora

Hey guys, so we had a celebration last night and they said they want a family  
picture but they will not upload when it includes me. Now this morning I am  
very surprised that the person who said that will not upload the pictures (my  
photo) uploaded it.

I am on a brink of destruction right  now.!

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-28 Thread pierrefalek


heyjoe,

I haven't ever meant that something free meant freedom.
I've well understood the term "Free software". I speak french, I still use  
"Libre".


You quote me but edited the sentence.

When I say "you are the product" it means that by being on Facebook, you are  
bringing FOR FREE contents to make Facebook attractive.

But you are not involved in the Facebook developement.
The content of Facebook, or the life of a lot of people is Facebook fortune !

If you pay the cable, you pay the cable company that gives you TV channels.  
If you pay a TV channel, you're not excepted to have any ads. But this  
channel is only for the ones who have paid. The are examples. It is simple.
But if your newspapers have ads, this is not a true independant newspapers.  
And they will not tell you anything wrong about their announcers.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-28 Thread pierrefalek


Mason,

You are preaching a conviced person.

The market share is also important and have to be noticed.

I live in a country where 51% of the people are on Facebook ! Even after  
Snowden revelations. And nothing have changed ! It is even worst !


A lot of people don't give a f*** about recognision database by private  
companies because of terrorism.

So, as people are always so intrested by the money, I talk about money.

I prefer relying the time people spend on Facebook and the time they can  
spend by earning money in exchange of a service as an employee.
Facebook is intresting for them because everyone's on it ! And spend precious  
time to make it "intresting" (or sort of when you read the average message  
you find on Facebook who are mostly stupid).

They create content !

But is this content creation is making a better world with less chemicals in  
food, or a fair-play economy ? No way !
Marketing by big companies and mass surveillance walks together on facebook.  
This a fact !

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-28 Thread studio


> Facebook is free, and always will

Free as in price doesn't mean freedom. The price we pay for using free things  
has turned out to be much higher than actually paying with money. Currently  
we pay for cable TV and 95% of the programs show commercials. Why? I don't  
want to watch commercials. I have paid, I have supported all those channels.  
Still they get the money and still they exploit my time. 2 hours movie comes  
with 30-40 minutes of ads. Every 20 minutes there is a 10min break for ads.


Same with Facebook: ads, tracking, etc.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-28 Thread Mason Hock

> Don't tell your family that using facebook is bad.
> It is not bad to share picture with other persons.
> 
> Just tell them that when a company like facebook is getting so bigger and
> lets no place for other social medias like diaspora* or gnu social (you can
> add the example of google), this is no longer a real liberal state.

I think you understate the problem. This is about more than market share. It's 
about mind control and surveillance. Using Facebook *is* bad, as in using it 
you subject yourself to psychological harm. Sharing pictures *is* bad when you 
are contributing them to a massive facial recognition database.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-28 Thread Mason Hock

There's one positive shred in that article.

"a growing number of coders and designers are quitting their jobs in 
disillusionment at what their work entails"

It's nice to hear that some individuals in Silicon Valley have a conscience. 
Unfortunately, quitting now might be too little too late.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-28 Thread greatgnu

“It’s possible that in 20 years we’ll look back at the current  
generation of children and say: ‘Look, they are socially different from  
every other generation of humans that came before and as a result this is a  
huge problem and maybe we need to regulate these behaviours.’


The damage is already done, their behavior is radically different from my  
generation's behavior and it doesn't take a genius to understand so. Have you  
been on a train lately or a bus or any of those places where kids get to be  
together? They could not be more alienated and separated from any reality  
than they currently are. It's disgusting, a shame.
Noam Chomsky once said: 'You have to pose on people what's called a  
"philosophy of futility". You have to focus them on the insignificant things  
of life, like fashionable consumption. And it makes perfect sense. The ideal  
is to have individuals who are totally disassociated from one another, whose  
conception of themselves, the sense of value is just "how many created wants  
can I satisfy?'

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-28 Thread pierrefalek


Dear Akito

Don't tell your family that using facebook is bad.
It is not bad to share picture with other persons.

Just tell them that when a company like facebook is getting so bigger and  
lets no place for other social medias like diaspora* or gnu social (you can  
add the example of google), this is no longer a real liberal state.


Your family certainely compares food trades, TV channels, smartphone,  
clothes...
Why the f*** not be able to compare another social media ? Or another search  
engine ?


Maybe other social medias can offer them features they don't have on facebook  
(and of course privacy).


People will thing they will downgrade by using such social media like  
diaspora*.


Facebook is free, and always will : so you are the product.

Diaspora* asks people to contribute to it wheras Facebool don't !
https://diasporafoundation.org/get_involved
People are asked to build their OWN social media !
The more people will use it, the more it will progress.
And when it's really builded by the people, it belongs to the people. Not to  
some shareholders. And you are sure it is fitted for you, because you  
contributed to it.


The real price of Facebook is around 5€ per mount (I live in europe).

Voilà !

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-28 Thread Mason Hock

Excellent article. Thanks for sharing.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-28 Thread studio


https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/jan/23/never-get-high-on-your-own-supply-why-social-media-bosses-dont-use-social-media

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-21 Thread studio


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r-e2NDSTuE

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-21 Thread i_write_words


Pascal and I can agree to disagree; his wager[1] still works:

1.)If I genuinely believed that a supreme deity who was keeping a list and  
checking it twice genuinely thought that I and everybody I cared about was  
naughty every time we tried to be nice, I would want to kick that (expletive)  
in the testicles.


2.)I don't like bitter, angry old people who hate the world any more than you  
do.


Therefore: Oh look, a pretty butterfly.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-21 Thread greatgnu

You touch a very important point indeed, joe. God is indeed almighty for  
he/she (I prefer 'it) is omnipresent and omniscient.


>The more I look at what is happening, the more I think: the only salvation  
is some deep genetic mutation which would make human species into something  
else.


Well, I retired into a cave, I have tons of cans and my laptop, I rarely see  
the light of the day (only when my Internet connection goes down, doesn't  
happen very often). The mutation has already started, a third is growing  
(which is quite useful so I can sip on my soda while typing this ^^

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-21 Thread khanhduongdv

> It's not a good feeling when you get up every morning knowing that your own  
government is tracking you. They told me later 'we knew when you got up, we  
knew when you left your house, we knew which vehicles you used, where you  
stopped, where you shopped', for every electronic communication was being  
monitored, on a 24/7 bases, including my phone.
> Where do you go in that regime? Where do you go? Where do you go? Where is  
a safe place? Where do you go to be yourself?


Those "nothing to hide" (or "nowhere to hide" as you say) people generally  
have no or very little concern about their government tracking them.


> If you think you are innocent, or that you have nothing to hide, you do not  
understand what is happening. Justice, like truth, in this system is not  
relevant. Ask Chelsea Manning, Julian Assange or Edward Snowden, along with  
whistle-blowers like Thomas Drake, where justice and truth got them.


"whistle-blower" is the keyword. Not many people decide to disclose secret  
information or do something else that bother their government, they don't  
believe that things happened to Manning, Assange or Snowden can apply to  
them, not to mention some of them have no respect for whistle-blowers.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-20 Thread studio

I find it not much different from the belief that there is an almighty entity  
(God) watching from above your every move and thought an deciding where you  
should go next.


The only difference - before it was an idea, now man has made it into a fact.  
So man created the idea of god, then started worshiping that idea, now man is  
trying to glorify himself through the realization of that sick idea.


The more I look at what is happening, the more I think: the only salvation is  
some deep genetic mutation which would make human species into something  
else. Otherwise we are simply finished.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-20 Thread greatgnu


Actually they got it wrong. They have **nowhere** to hide, not 'nothing'.

Allow me share some food for your brain


It's not a good feeling when you get up every morning knowing that your own  
government is tracking you. They told me later 'we knew when you got up, we  
knew when you left your house, we knew which vehicles you used, where you  
stopped, where you shopped', for every electronic communication was being  
monitored, on a 24/7 bases, including my phone.


Where do you go in that regime? Where do you go? Where do you go? Where is a  
safe place? Where do you go to be yourself?


Thomas Andrews Drake

If you think you are innocent, or that you have nothing to hide, you do not  
understand what is happening. Justice, like truth, in this system is not  
relevant. Ask Chelsea Manning, Julian Assange or Edward Snowden, along with  
whistle-blowers like Thomas Drake, where justice and truth got them.


Chris Hedges


--

Where is a safe place? Where do you go to be yourself?

^ This is the very definition of privacy. It has nothing to do wahtsoever  
with 'hiding'.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-20 Thread khanhduongdv

Too many people have "nothing to hide". I find it very hard to argue with  
them.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

What is Seafile?


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

On Thu, 2018-01-18 at 15:48 +0100, dh...@fastmail.com wrote:
> If family black sheep had grades, mine would be obsidian.
> 
> I simply tell them that they have  
> already fucked their privacy and they are beyond help; they can figure out  
> how to reset their password on their own. 

I don't do it that harshly.  I simply tell the truth: "I haven't used
that in a long time. I have no clue how it works, and I don't use
proprietary software, so I'm not going to figure it out.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

On Sun, 2018-01-14 at 10:48 +0100, i_write_wo...@posteo.net wrote:
> I have very little to add except for a caution: if you are a minor and maybe  
> even if you aren't, please do not email pictures of yourself to Facebook  
> addicts.

Thank you for mentioning this.  I never thought about simply not
distributing photos to Facebook users.  This is a sane policy.  I like
it.  

It may also carry he incidental benefit of pressuring them to leave
Facebook: "I won't give you photos as long as you are being used by
Facebook."

-- 
Caleb Herbert
OpenPGP public key: http://bluehome.net/csh/pubkey


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

On Sat, 2018-01-13 at 22:55 -0800, Mason Hock wrote:
> Facebook is designed to addict its "users" with what its former 
> vice-president describes as "dopemine-driven feedback loops."
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/dec/11/facebook-former-executive-ripping-society-apart
> 
> Your family's rationalizations for subjecting themselves to Facebook's abuse 
> are typical of any kind of addict. It is important to understand how 
> difficult it is for an addict to acknowledge that they are no longer in 
> control of their own lives.
> 
> It sounds like you have tried to reason with them and it has not worked. This 
> is unsuprising but you should not give up. While you cannot control the way 
> they think, you can provide context that may help them eventually reach the 
> same conclusion independently.
> 
> It will also help to identify the need that Facebook fulfills for them and 
> suggest healthier alternatives. A friend recently told me that he began 
> transitioning to vegetarianism not by removing meat from his diet, but by 
> introducing tofu into his diet. It is easier to eliminate something from your 
> life when you have the security of a familiar replacement. Depending on your 
> family's situation, there are several replacements you may try to introduce 
> them to before you attempt to convince them to abandon Facebook completely.

Yes.  As a vegan, I can also attest to this.  It's easier to stop eating
a food when it's crowded out, rather than taken out.  When there are so
many different types of new beans, grains and milks to try, it's easy to
just "accidentally forget" to consume the old stuff.

> (1) Offline interaction. If you live near your family, you may propose 
> spending more time with them in person. You do not have to present this as a 
> replacement for Facebook, because it is worthwhile in itself. If you do not 
> live near your family, frequent phone calls may be enough. You say that your 
> mother is angry at you for avoiding Facebook. Perhaps this is because 
> Facebook has convinced her that it is her only way to have a relationship 
> with you. If so, it is understandable that you avoiding Facebook would scare 
> her. If you can show her that Facebook is unecessary to maintain 
> relationships she might feel less dependent on it.

Facebook employs the same techniques to stay in people's life.  When I
quit, it sent me email saying "Your friends miss you."

> (2) Online alternatives to dedicated "social media." Email and XMPP can serve 
> many of the same functions as Facebook with less risk of those needs being 
> associated with a proprietary interface. Email photos to your family. 
> Encourage them to chat with you via XMPP. Maybe act a little annoyed at 
> *them* if they refuse to connect with you this way. Facebook did not invent 
> chatting, blogging, or sharing photographs. Their innovation was aggregating 
> these technologies into an addictive interface. You can show your family that 
> they do not need rely on Facebook for these features.

These won't work as a replacement.  During the course of in-person
interaction, the need for them will naturally grow, and only then should
you introduce them.  "Well, if you really NEED to do this online instead
of in person, I GUESS we can use Syncplay and VLC."

-- 
Caleb Herbert
OpenPGP public key: http://bluehome.net/csh/pubkey


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again


> I am sorry for you m8. Get a job maybe and your place so you can distribute  
> fuckoffs in complete tranquility

I'm not the OP, but I am in the same boat.  I have a job, but it doesn't
pay enough for me to support myself fully.  Transportation is especially
expensive!  (More than $210 US each month.)
-- 
Caleb Herbert
OpenPGP public key: http://bluehome.net/csh/pubkey


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again