Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-11 Thread vpro
Marrying a young girl (litterally: becoming master of the girl) is not illegal in the Old Testament, Islam, Vedic tradition, nor is it illegal in other eastern belief systems. It is illegal in the global religion that the United States and Britian has foisted upon the world and maintains

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-11 Thread vpro
Ah yes, your US religion's doctrine of informed consent. Which outlaws men marrying young girls no matter what. I hope some day your doctrines go back to the hell they came from and we have back the old ways where we could be ba'al of a girl. But yes, ofcourse ofcourse, the greatest sin in

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-11 Thread shiretoko
He stated clearly that just saying yes is not enough, since we can't be sure if this yes was only spoken because of fear. He meant real consent. In my opinion, we can never be sure whether it's real consent or not in case of children. We would need the possibility to ask the child 30 years

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-11 Thread Andrew R .
On 03/08/13 05:32, erikthorsen wrote: fucking little kids up the ass is fine so long as they say yes. How exactly does a discussion about security in Trisquel evolve into a discussion about anal sex? Andrew.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-03 Thread gnuser
Lol, thanks for the heads up :P I might try it, do you know if they have a CD ISO, or do they work with DVD ISO only?

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-02 Thread tegskywalker
Even RMS thinks child pornography is ok along with adultry, prositution and necrophilia: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-02 Thread shiretoko
Even RMS thinks child pornography is ok along with adultry, prositution and necrophilia: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman This is absolutely wrong. He thinks those things are ok as *long es no one gets coerced*; this statement excludes almost every child porn on the net, so he

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-02 Thread erikthorsen
Yeah right, 'cause there's totally an easy way to determine coersion and consent in the cases of child abuse, beastiality and necrophilia.. Please. That's just a downright disgusting thing to say.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-02 Thread onpon4
It's also a non-sequitur, because what RMS has said on the issue has nothing to do with what vPro has said. vPro advocates the right to marry children, RMS says he thinks child pornography can be consensual (he hasn't said whether or not he thinks it's possible to know whether or not it's

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-02 Thread erikthorsen
Stallman lumps all those things together, thus he apparently thinks they're related.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-02 Thread onpon4
Really? I didn't see him do that. I only saw him mention them together because they all have being illegal in common.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-02 Thread onpon4
Looking at the actual source, he didn't even mention them together. Some politician did, and he was just responding to that politician: The nominee is quoted as saying that if the choice of a sexual partner were protected by the Constitution, prostitution, adultery, necrophilia,

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-02 Thread erikthorsen
...Yeah, so Stallman DOES lump them all together as equal and says that fucking little kids up the ass is fine so long as they say yes. So.. Thanks for proving my point..?

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-02 Thread Michał Masłowski
Where does he equate saying yes with lack of coercion? How is this related to Trisquel? Why not discuss it in the offtopic forum at https://trisquel.info/en/forum/troll-hole? pgpA17RcilHlK.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-02 Thread erikthorsen
Last I checked coersion simply means forcing someone to do something against their will. Thus the antonym would be consent.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-02 Thread shiretoko
I didn't claim there is an easy way to determine coersion. I think when we're talking about child abuse, we almost never can determine the lack of coersion with certanty and so these things have definitely to be forbidden and get punished very hard; but talking about necrophilia - I think

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-01 Thread shiretoko
I also think about buying a yeeloong but after everything I've read, watching youtube videos / videos in general will be difficult. I quote this link: http://b.mtjm.eu/lemote-yeeloong.html Gentoo has patches making full-screen low quality YouTube videos playable (used WatchVideo for this),

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-01 Thread Andrew R .
On 01/08/13 19:53, shiretoko wrote: Don't know if it's possible to liberate gentoo; we could kick out the default kernel and use linux-libre instead, but I don't know if they have free-only repos. I think Ututo is (or was?) based on Gentoo. But I don't know how English-friendly it is. I recall

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-01 Thread Michał Masłowski
So I think you need some special patches for watching low-res-videos (!) which are only provided by gentoo. The fact that only Gentoo provides them is not important. No one had applied them in gNS nor Parabola since e.g. they might depend on other X.Org versions, recent X.Org broke other

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-01 Thread migatheotaku
He does talk about marrying little girls a lot around here, doesn't he? There's probably some way to do it if you really wanted to, but why would you want to? I honestly can't think of any positives of marrying a kid, or, hell, even a kid that would want to be married at such a young age to

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-01 Thread gnuser
Yes, it's really a broken system by this point. There are two alternatives to someone who wants to be a little bit safer: 1. Use something like Web of Trust. At least you have the power of community to back you up. 2. Test the site fingerprint manually in

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-01 Thread gnuser
I don't think he is a pedophile (not what we would normally call one at least). Nor a troll. There seems to be something more to him than we see right now... But yeah, he is annoying and a little crazy, agree on that.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-01 Thread gnuser
Ahaha, your avatar actually looks like she just read vPro comments, asking to marry her xD xD Anyway, the point is... I totally agree with you, open standards are the future! And I totally support them. But I was talking about a solution for now, as in I need a free clean computer to use

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-08-01 Thread migatheotaku
What would really kick things off is a freedom friendly version of the Raspberry Pi. Those computers are really cool (and for all we know, the future of computing), but unfortunately there exists no freedom friendly device like that yet (that I know of). But just imagine, a ~$35 freedom

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-31 Thread erikthorsen
Hehe. =P Well, yeah, but they probably wouldn't be all nice and sexy copylefted hardware. And there are other use cases too.. Then again, most people have fancy smartphones now so yeah. Well, they do link to an explaination on how to add the proper root certificates. As for the

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-31 Thread gnuser
Thanks for the link! From what I read, the beagle board can actually use a free bios and can work without proprietary drivers except for 3d acceleration. Let's face it, it's the same problem we have in most laptops (graphics cards usually won't have free drivers providing 3d acceleration)

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-31 Thread gnuser
Thanks Lembas. But, I know that I need to install that and I know how to dot it. It's just that in order to keep my system safe I don't go around installing anything just because some website says me trust me, install this and dive in! But yeah, If I need to actually take a look at

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-31 Thread gnuser
Lol, yeah, I was just making a joke :P Already explained the certificate thing in above comment, and as for the last statement =( damn! I was really getting excited (thinking that if Ubuntu ran there, Trisquel would run too) and now, it all comes down to this. Hum well, I will hardly

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-31 Thread mikko . viinamaki
You're welcome. It's just that in order to keep my system safe I don't go around installing anything just because some website says me trust me, install this and dive in! This is a very sound policy. I think things from the repo are inherently safer. The whole situation with the

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-30 Thread javiparpe
The Trisquel developers are doing more than just cleaning the Ubuntu repositories, they take packages from others distros too, even directly from Debian. I've also seen some other packages that are not from other distro. What i want to tell is that they are working hard to make this distro

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-30 Thread gnuser
Not phoning home? A friend in my book :P But honestly, if I wanted a music player and a calculator... I would buy a music player and a calculator :P As for gnewsense, well, their latest stable was 2009 and ever since they released 2 betas... Not what I call a solid development and support.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-30 Thread pedrosilva
https://www.fsf.org/resources/hw/single-board-computers

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-30 Thread mikko . viinamaki
I haven't checked Parabola yet, mainly because the website has a unknown certificate. sudo apt-get install ca-certificates

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-29 Thread gromobir
Great to see so many updates coming in but why did this even happen? I also thought that there is some kind of automatic synchronization with the Ubuntu repositories. What if this happens again in the future? I would be very happy to get an official response to clarify this stuff. Is there

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-29 Thread bert . frohn
Yes, solve this bug https://trisquel.info/en/issues/4528# become a associate member https://trisquel.info/en/member# :)

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-29 Thread gromobir
I doubt that more money will directly lead to more updates, though I agree that it is a good way to show your love. If it's true that only two guys are running this whole distribution, there needs to be another solution. Either: 1.) More core members 2.) A way to sync the Ubuntu repos with

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-29 Thread shiretoko
Well, I hesitate to become a member because of the concept of the beneficial dictator for life. I don't know quidam and he may be a nice person, but I don't think a dictatorship will encourage more people to join the development team or is a good idea for any other reason. Why not make

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-29 Thread vpro
Moot point with intel (and amd?) AMT/vPro. There is no security anymore. Even if you de-provision it fully, it can always be remotely re-enabled. Nothing at all we can ever do about this. All haswell mobile CPU's have vPro / Intel AMT. It is a hardware level backdoor that cannot be fully

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-29 Thread vpro
Intel decides AMT will be in all it's CPUs. AMD too. They decided that because our feminist(not really related but they are)/neo-liberal/good-person rulers decided they must put backdoors in hardware. You have to deal with that dictatorship. Why complain now? The society(people in

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-29 Thread gnuser
I guess one solution would be to stick with older machines for as long as possible. If you can, avoid laptops, and use a tower with free software only friend hardware. It's not perfect but is a solution. As for laptops, if you can get one from a trusted friend (someone who you know didn't

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-29 Thread erikthorsen
Well, for those who want the latest and greatest all day, every day, there's always Parabola.. =P Flip side of course being that you'd have to properly install and configure Parabola. That being said, quite frankly, anyone stupid enough to allow a something as powerful as java to be executed

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-29 Thread gnuser
I totally agree with you, and I forgot to mention yeeloong. But as far as I know, yeeloong won't run trisquel. =S What are those nanonote?

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-29 Thread erikthorsen
True. =x But you could put Parabola or gNewSense on there. It's a tiny pocket computer which can run LibreWRT. Open hardware and the whole shebang. Think it's more or less out of production at this stage though. =( http://en.qi-hardware.com/wiki/Ben_NanoNote

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-29 Thread tegskywalker
There's a big difference between Canonical, who runs Ubuntu, and Trisquel. Canonicial puts a lot of effort into taking the Debian repositories and making them stable for Ubuntu. These Ubuntu repositories are also used by Ubuntu deriatives like Linux Mint and Trisquel. The big difference is

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-29 Thread gnuser
I went to read about Nano, it seems interesting, but yes, still can't think of a use for it. Maybe soon I hope. As for the Yeeloong, I don't really think I would change from Trisquel to GNewSense. Just no comparison. Trisquel is more or less updated, it has a solid users community, I

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-29 Thread erikthorsen
Well, least you can be sure it's not phoning home or anything.. 'cause there are no radios.. And u'know. Music player and graph calculator I guess. =P True, true. Not to mention it's quite a significant compromise in terms of hardware. x) There is active development going on with gNewSense

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-28 Thread gromobir
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE SYNC THE TRISQUEL REPOS!!! I second this!

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-28 Thread javiparpe
I think Trisquel needs more developers, when you see the develpoment team, you see only two people managing the project. The good part is that even with this limitation, Trisquel is one of the best pure free distros... but it still needs more.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-28 Thread veganix
Problem seems to be solved now - updates for abrowser, openJDK, kernel and more today. Abrowser is now at 22.0, OpenJDK7 at u25 :)

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-28 Thread gnuser
Hooray! That's great news! Trisquel is once again keeping up with the needs of the users. Still the best operating system that I could use right now ;)

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-28 Thread tegskywalker
I thought the Trisquel repos automatically mirrored the Ubuntu ones daily and blacklisted certain packages from being integrated. If that was the case, updates like OpenJDK would show up that day and .it a week later.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-28 Thread jason
There is much to learn, young padawan.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-27 Thread gnuser
Well, this is indeed a very important issue, and we should all look at it as a priority. I don't have Java installed (any kind of it, free or not), and I don't have flash either (gnash or flash or whatever). And for people who don't need them, I would suggest you uninstall them. Another

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-27 Thread tegskywalker
I fixed the OpenJDK issue by creating a separate ubuntu.list file in my /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ directory with my local Ubuntu mirror for 12.04 to nab the main and universe repos. I had to manually import the Ubuntu Archives key (since Trisquel does not have it), install OpenJDK u25,

[Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-25 Thread tegskywalker
I made a post about this earlier, but OpenJDK 7 has not been updated to u25 in the Trisquel repos and leaves everyone who has an older version installed vulnerable. If anyone follows the Java world, it is always targeted for attacks (especially the web plugin) and having the latest is ALWAYS

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-25 Thread gromobir
You are totally right! I also started a thread about this some time ago. [1] This really needs to be adressed! Is there anything we as normal users could do? [1]: https://trisquel.info/en/forum/trisquel-update-policy

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-25 Thread tegskywalker
Yeah, being stuck at 21 for Abrowser isn't helping either. I may have to manually update my OpenJDK from the Ubuntu repos if the Trisquel ones are updated. I've been using the latest stable Chromium (v28) from https://launchpad.net/~alt-os/+archive/chromium while waiting for Abrowser to

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-25 Thread gameboyab
Maybe Trisquel should put Abrowser on the long term support release of Mozilla.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point

2013-07-25 Thread tegskywalker
The ESR versions of Firefox still get updates, but those updates are point releases like 20.1 and 20.2. I don't see the point of moving to ESR since the browser has to be cleaned by Ruben with each update either way.