date:20180113

ADFENO is right as usual. We should not allow Google to control our access to 
videos or information in any other form. Try to acquire information from other 
sources when you can, and if you have videos or other media to share I 
recommend MediaGoblin as a replacement for YouTube, DeviantArt, and similar 
sites. However, in situations where for some reason you must access YouTube to 
watch a video, I suggest avoiding youtube.com and using one of the other 
methods that have been suggested to you.

Re: [Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

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.

(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.

(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.

(3) A libre, decentralized replacement for Facebook. I am aware of three:
Diaspora, Friendica, and GNU Social. Of these, Diaspora will probably be the
most appealing to your family. Many Diaspora pods support cross-posting to
Facebook or Twitter, meaning that your family may post photos to Diaspora for
you to see that are also posted to Facebook for their other friends to see.
Ideally they would not provide any information to Facebook, but this will at
least allow them to do so without engaging with Facebook's addictive interface
and introduce them to a more freedom-respecting replacement. I have some
concerns about Diaspora. Although it is free software and I suspect no malice
from the developers, I worry that it unintentionally inherits some addictive
antifeatures from Facebook in an attempt to replace it. That said, it is far
better than Facebook, as any accidental antifeatures may be removed by
exercising freedoms 1 and 3, while Facebook will continue to refine its
intentional antifeatures and will not allow you the freedom to remove them.

Let me know if I can clarify anything I've written. It is difficult to have a
discussion like this in a language that is not your native one. It is admirable
that you are participating in a forum that is not in your native language in
order to help your family.

[Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

2018-01-13 Thread sora


Please excuse my english grammar, I am not an english native speaker.
 y entire family use facebook (it is all my fault for creating accounts for  
them  years ago), now they use Instagram and twitter, but my mother is very  
addicted to FB--or just all of them. Now when they do pictures they just  
upload and upload it to those privacy violating services, I many times do not  
want to be in those pictures and I avoid it as much as possible however my  
mother is too too angry that there are some repercussions to me for not  
participating in those activities(pictures, selfies etc, it is like they are  
the new teenagers than I), it appears that I am now the black sheep of the  
family. Is there any way for me to convince them that using and uploading  
pictures to those services and internet are bad? I always say to them about  
the global surveillance disclosures but they seem to ignore and defeat me  
with the statement, "They have nothing to hide so they do not care, or that I  
am just a small fish to catch, or worse I am just being paranoid." Anyway I  
showed them the picture of zuckerberg with the Instagram 500M likes, in the  
background his macbook webcam is covered with tape(it does not have any  
effect to them) it was posted in the other topic "Mission impossible: family  
privacy" but it that topic but my situation is quite the opposite.

[Trisquel-users] Re : Web Browser

The problem with this statement is that you know (or rather can check) only  
what happens on the sending side.


That is correct.  But there is no magic: if you send little information, then  
little information is received on the other side.  If you add noise, the  
receiver can exploit it even less.


That is a basic test which shows if there is a communication or not.

Too basic.  Looking at what is communicated is relevant.

If there is communication and it is not anonymized through TOR (it is not) -  
that obviously is a privacy issue. That is quite simple.


If you consider that having the receiver know your Web browser is opened,  
then yes.  And you should be able to disable the service it provides to stop  
that communication... but if that service is useful and cannot be achieved on  
your own computer (it is not SaaSS), then it does require communication and  
you may decide it is worth giving the information required to get the  
service.


Are privacy and security 2 incompatible mutually exclusive concepts? Or  
rather because someone has designed a program in a way in which you must  
sacrifice one for the other?


It is physically impossible to request information from a third party without  
communication.  For example, you cannot ask whether a site is phishing  
without communication.  You have to either choose choose privacy (no  
communication) over security (no warning about phishing) or the opposite  
(communicating the relevant information to receive the warnings).  To make  
that choice, looking at what is actually communicated (how much privacy is  
sacrificed) is relevant to most users.  If you consider that no service is  
worth communicating your IP address, then, really, there is no need to look  
at what is communicated... and you should stay offline (when you access this  
forum, Trisquel knows about it, your ISP too).  Since you are online, you  
actually accept to send the relevant information (lose some privacy) to do  
whatever you do online.


If you seek for compromise what happens is giving up freedom in exchange for  
convenience?


You need not compromise on freedom.  You should always stay in control of  
your own life.  In computing, that means only using free software.  There is  
no physical impossibility here (whereas requesting information without  
communication is impossible): every piece of software can be and should be  
free software.


Meanwhile Intel ME can be sending data to organization X "User N, located ...  
is currently admiring the source code of Hello world".


Yes.  Intel ME, like any piece of software, can be and should be free  
software.


There are organizations which consider that censoring entire geographic  
regions from accessing particular websites is a useful feature for the safety  
of the region. Should we agree to that too?


No.  And that has absolutely nothing to do with our conversation.

There is enough evidence that the price people pay for using all kinds of  
"useful features" is pretty high.


"All kinds of useful features" is too general to state anything about them.   
Again: details matter.  I explained you the price of receiving warnings about  
phishing.  You can consider that price too high.  Other users, most users I  
believe, consider it is not.  I have Safe Browsing disabled because I do not  
think I need it.  However, I let it enabled on my parents' computer (that I  
administrate).


I disagree to the centralized nature of it held in the hands of a single  
entity which can control it.


There is a performance compromise too.  I do not think (I may be wrong)  
anybody knows how to have a distributed Safe Browsing system that would not  
significantly slow down page loading.  Do you know?


As long as we cannot check for ourselves what exactly is happening on the  
other side of the wire it is all wishful thinking.


There is no magic: if you send little information, then little information is  
received on the other side.  If you add noise (like Firefox does with Safe  
Browsing), the receiver can exploit it even less.


uppose I am the victim. I (a layman) don't know. I (a non-programmer) have  
not checked the source code. I (an average user) am forced to trust because  
there is a huge mountain of information which I need to dig in order to find  
out the truth, it is growing every day and a lifetime wouldn't suffice for  
it. But still I refuse to trust articles and want truth, not words, because I  
don't want to depend on another. I don't want my child (if I have one) to be  
tracked, logged, turned into a cog of a huge machine. What am I to do?


You trust the community.  Even if you were a programmer, it is impossible to  
read all the software you run: a life time is not enough.  Exercising a  
collective control over the software is the reason for freedom 3.


If you do not want to trust the community, then you should stop using  
software.  I see no other possibility.  The four freedoms do not solve

Re: [Trisquel-users] (Trisquel 8) Problems with installing add-ons in Abrowser

2018-01-13 Thread bob

I find it easier just to install redshift through the Trisquel repositories  
:D

http://jonls.dk/redshift/

Re: [Trisquel-users] How to fix a java compiling problem with Geany.

2018-01-13 Thread bob

It looks like you're trying to run Java 8 code on a Java 7 runtime. (Java is  
backwards-compatible, but not forwards-compatible!


If you're triggering it from the command line you need to set the right  
environment variables. On Trisquel there are helper applications that can  
assist you. For example:


sudo update-alternatives --config java

This will show you all the versions of Java you have installed. Simply make  
sure you select version 8 for your code to work.


If this doesn't fix your problem then I'm guessing you need to change the  
configuration of your project in Geany. (I've not used that particular IDE  
before, so I'm going by what the usual solution would be in Eclipse/IntelliJ  
CE)

[Trisquel-users] How to fix a java compiling problem with Geany.

2018-01-13 Thread cuculus


Short answer: Update to openjdk version 8.


The problem:
After downloading Geany 1.32 from the website and installing onto Trisquel 7  
64-bit, my .java programs gave the following error when I tried to compile  
them:


Exception in thread "main" java.lang.UnsupportedClassVersionError: filename :  
Unsupported major.minor version 52.



The fix:
The problem was fixed after installing some packages:

sudo apt install openjdk-8-dbg openjdk-7-dbg openjdk-7-jdk openjdk-7-demo  
openjdk-7-source visualvm


Many of these probably didn't help; I installed them because apt recommended  
them. The package that fixed the problem was probably openjdk-8-dbg. I'm too  
lazy to check though-- sorry. I had previously installed the following:  
openjdk-8-jdk openjdk-8-jre openjdk-8-jre-headless.


I can once again compile .java programs with Geany.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Videotelephony on Trisquel 7

2018-01-13 Thread i_write_words

Does Riot still work? I never used the videoconferencing feature, but it's  
what I'm using to communicate with my person in written English.


The web app is/was easy to install on T7 if you're having the same problems  
with your browser that I am on what I have to use instead of Trisquel or Uruk  
temporarily.


HTH and still trying to come up with other and/or better ideas if it doesn't.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Videotelephony on Trisquel 7

2018-01-13 Thread member

I use wire for videocalls. One downside though... You don't known when the  
other person is online. Otherwise it does the job.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Web Browser

Just for the sake of privacy investigation I tested the same way Thunderbird  
(without any profile/mail configured). On startup it  immediately makes  
connections to Amazon, Linode, Comodo, Akamai and other hosts etc. The  
majority are HTTPS but some are plain HTTP connections.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Are Big Sacrifice

2018-01-13 Thread i_write_words

Yuck. Me too. It's not worth leaving the ethernet cable plugged into my own  
32 bit Uruk box long enough to avoid looking like an idiot, but here's a  
screenshot in case it helps Mr. Banana get you back up and running safely.


I've already talked to Hayder about this and it's not on their end unless the  
Uruk devs have an undiagnosed espresso deficiency or actually need to sleep  
or something.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Are Big Sacrifice

2018-01-13 Thread ariella

Thank you MB and Banana. That would explain it. I might have to reach out to  
Minifree then. :)


Thanks for the help.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Web Browser

> Taking a look at outgoing connections is not enough to deem how  
privacy-respectful a feature is. And that feature has advantages too.


The problem with this statement is that you know (or rather can check) only  
what happens on the sending side. So you don't have enough data to evaluate  
the advantages in relation to what you sacrifice in order to receive them.  
That is a basic test which shows if there is a communication or not. Nothing  
more or less. If there is communication and it is not anonymized through TOR  
(it is not) - that obviously is a privacy issue. That is quite simple.


> A compromise has to be sought.

Why? Are privacy and security 2 incompatible mutually exclusive concepts? Or  
rather because someone has designed a program in a way in which you must  
sacrifice one for the other? If you seek for compromise what happens is  
giving up freedom in exchange for convenience?


> What I am saying is: details matter.

Yes, they do - but only in their entirity. Only then one can match the  
details to the big picture. Otherwise we can look at an isolated beautiful  
"print('Hello world')" and admire how clean and safe it is. Meanwhile Intel  
ME can be sending data to organization X "User N, located ... is currently  
admiring the source code of Hello world".


> Take Safe Browsing for example... Let us agree it is a useful feature.

There are organizations which consider that censoring entire geographic  
regions from accessing particular websites is a useful feature for the safety  
of the region. Should we agree to that too? It's a fact, not an article.  
There is enough evidence that the price people pay for using all kinds of  
"useful features" is pretty high.


That said: I do agree that having a blacklist may be useful. But I disagree  
to the centralized nature of it held in the hands of a single entity which  
can control it. As long as we cannot check for ourselves what exactly is  
happening on the other side of the wire it is all wishful thinking.


> Now, you know Google is actually managing the lists of pages known for  
phishing or of known malware. If you stop your investigation at that point,  
you may believe that every URL that ends up in your address bar is sent to  
Google along with your IP address. *That* would be a privacy nightmare not  
worth the enhanced security... but SafeBrowsing, in Firefox, does not work  
that way.


> https://feeding.cloud.geek.nz/posts/how-safe-browsing-works-in-firefox/  
explains how it works. And anybody can check whether it is true, thanks to  
freedom 1.


Suppose I am the victim. I (a layman) don't know. I (a non-programmer) have  
not checked the source code. I (an average user) am forced to trust because  
there is a huge mountain of information which I need to dig in order to find  
out the truth, it is growing every day and a lifetime wouldn't suffice for  
it. But still I refuse to trust articles and want truth, not words, because I  
don't want to depend on another. I don't want my child (if I have one) to be  
tracked, logged, turned into a cog of a huge machine. What am I to do? You  
see - the question is much bigger than F0-4.


The particular article you linked says:

'Google explicitly states that the information collected as part of operating  
the Safe Browsing service "is only used to flag malicious activity and is  
never used anywhere else at Google" and that "Safe Browsing requests won't be  
associated with your Google Account"'


Ok, Google states that. They state all kinds of things.  Even without that:  
We all know very well that each server stores logs. Also one doesn't need to  
be a professor to know how this works with a company part of PRISM program.  
What do you think happens when NSA comes and says "We will take these servers  
to search them"? Will Google will say "sorry, we won't allow you to do that  
because we have written this and that on a web page"? If we believe that, we  
can easily install Microsoft Windows and turn on Windows Defender because it  
is a useful feature.


> Mozilla's telemetry. heyjoe's bug, filed against the "telemetry" component,  
pretended the opposite. He had not understood that the settings in  
about:config depend on each other: if  
datareporting.healthreport.uploadEnabled (the setting that can be set from  
the preferences) is false, no telemetry is sent, whatever the values of other  
entries in about:config that stands for more specific tunings of the  
telemetry component.


My test does not pretend anything - it proves something, providing actual,  
verifiable facts. It seems you have not read the bug report comments  
carefully because one of the attached logs clearly shows: after additional  
disabling of various telemetry flags in about:config the amount of packets  
detected by tcpdump is reduced almost in half. This means that those  
additional settings do something and they are not insignificant in relation  
to other disabled flags.


> So, through

Re: [Trisquel-users] Videotelephony on Trisquel 7

2018-01-13 Thread Alexander Stephen Thomas Ross

was this after installing updates?
other wise maybe they need a newer version of firefox(what abrowser is
based on)? they might have upgraded the JavaScript of the services using
new things in latest ff version?

[Trisquel-users] Videotelephony on Trisquel 7

I used to use http://meet.jit.si or http://vroom.im to do videotelephony  
through WebRTC between two Trisquel 7 systems separated by an ocean (I live  
in Brazil, my family in France).  They do not work anymore.  Maybe because of  
enhanced privacy settings in Abrowser that I could reverse?  What alternative  
reliable (and hopefully simple) solution would you recommend me?  I can  
install anything on both Trisquel 7 systems.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Are Big Sacrifice

2018-01-13 Thread trisquellist

To those who use an up-to-date Uruk GNU/Linux: Does Uruk (or probably just  
its default file manager, I think it was Caja, in its default configuration)  
still have these two bugs?
One was that it tried to open everything and their dog using the image viewer  
(or document viewer?): When you use the file manager for a search, move focus  
to one of the results, an ogg file for example, call up the context menu and  
select "open containing folder", expected behaviour would be that you will  
see the contents of the folder listed in a file manager window, be it a new  
one or the one you were using. Instead, this will summon up the viewer which  
will immediately tell you that it was unable to open the thing. There were  
other, non-search related cases where the file manager (or Uruk) thought the  
viewer would be best to open a common file type when it obviously was neither  
an image nor a document.
The second bug that bugged me was: In the file manager, move focus to a  
listed file, press F2, use Ctrl+← or Ctrl+→. Expected behaviour: Cursor  
(or "caret"?) moves left or right within the file name, word by word.  
Observed behaviour: As soon as you hit Ctrl, focus jumps to the left side  
pane where the shortcuts are, canceling the file renaming. I can't remember  
if pressing Ctrl triggered this focus move when I wasn't trying to rename a  
file, for example to select non-adjacent files by holding Ctrl.

Re: [Trisquel-users] (Trisquel 8) Problems with installing add-ons in Abrowser

I just tried running it myself. You'll get a message saying the terminal must 
re restarted. Don't worry when you this. Nothing went wrong. I think it just 
means that you need to restart the terminal to apply the new theme. After that, 
you can apply the new theme to the terminal in 'Edit->Profile 
Preferences'->Colors. Under 'Built-in schemes' for text and background color 
you will now see 'Solarized Dark' and 'Solarized Light' as options. Under 
'Built-in schemes' for color palatte you will see 'Solarized'.

Sidenote: Solarized-Dark rocks. I recognize it now from /r/unixporn, but hadn't 
known what it was called. I think I will always use it from now on. It greatly 
reduces the amount of light entering my eye holes without compromising 
readability.

Re: [Trisquel-users] (Trisquel 8) Problems with installing add-ons in Abrowser

$ git clone https://github.com/oz123/solarized-mate-terminal.git

Creates a copy "clone" of the repository at that URL. It will be saved in 
whatever directory you are currently in. When you open a new terminal you will 
start out in youhome directly '~', equivalent to /home/your-username.

The terminal command to move to a different directory is 'cd' (change 
directory). Enter the directory you created with 'git clone' with

$ cd solarised-mate-terminal

and run the script with

$ ./solarized-mate.sh

The reason you can't just type 'solarized-mate.sh' is that it will be assumed 
that 'solarized-mate.sh' is in your path, which you can think of as where your 
terminal commands are stored. The '.' in './solarized-mate.sh' means current 
directory. You can test this with 'cd .' after which you will be in the same 
directory you started. Itis also useful to know that '..' means parent 
directory, so 'cd ..' takes you one directory level up.

[Trisquel-users] Re : Web Browser

Yeah, as I said a truly libre and privacy friendly browser would not come  
with a ton of antiprivacy nonsense and a user should not have to do such a  
hard work to 'clean it up'.


Taking a look at outgoing connections is not enough to deem how  
privacy-respectful a feature is.  And that feature has advantages too.  A  
compromise has to be sought.  What I am saying is: details matter.


Take Safe Browsing for example.  The feature you manually disable after  
copying pyllyukko's user.js.  That feature aims to warn a user who is about  
to access a page that is known for phishing or about to download known  
malware.  Let us agree it is a useful feature.


Now, you know Google is actually managing the lists of pages known for  
phishing or of known malware.  If you stop your investigation at that point,  
you may believe that every URL that ends up in your address bar is sent to  
Google along with your IP address.  *That* would be a privacy nightmare not  
worth the enhanced security... but SafeBrowsing, in Firefox, does not work  
that way.


https://feeding.cloud.geek.nz/posts/how-safe-browsing-works-in-firefox/  
explains how it works.  And anybody can check whether it is true, thanks to  
freedom 1.  In the case of phishing:


Every 30 minutes, Firefox downloads, from a Safe Browsing server, a list of  
4-byte hashes of URLs, which were deemed unsafe since the last update;
Whenever the user is about to visit a page, the hash of its URL (excluding  
what is following a possible "?" in the URL) is compared with those in the  
local lists (no outgoing connection here);
If it is not found, the page is displayed; otherwise the 4-byte hash is sent  
to a Safe Browsing server which returns all unsafe URLs matching the hash  
(there may be several: hashes suffer from collisions) and Firefox locally  
checks whether one of them is the URL to be accessed (if so, the warning is  
displayed; otherwise the page);
To enhance privacy, Firefox requests, from time to time, the URLs of random  
hashes taken in the list.



So, through Safe Browsing, Google only knows:

every 30 minutes, that an IP address has a Web browser opened;
that the user may (or not: because Firefox adds noise) have visited a URL  
whose hash was sent: it may be one of the unsafe pages having this hash or a  
safe page with the same hash.



Not the privacy nightmare a naive implementation would yield.  Safe  
Browsing's protection against malware is more intrusive.  To block malware,  
even if it comes from unlisted pages, metadata about all binaries Firefox is  
about to download are sent to a Safe Browsing server.  The risk of installing  
malware for GNU/Linux is probably not worth the privacy loss.  That is why  
Abrowser disables that part of Safe Browsing by default.


You see: a compromise is sought between security, privacy, performance and  
ease of use (Firefox's preferences only propose a global switch to disable  
Safe Browsing as a whole).  The balance between those features (again:  
security, privacy, performance, ease of use, ... are features/capabilities,  
not freedoms) cannot suit every user.  But it not "antiprivacy nonsense": for  
most users, being warned that a page is phishing (maybe imitating the page of  
your bank) is worth having Google know every 30 minutes that they have a Web  
browser opened and having it possibly guess (with a rather small probability)  
that they visited some specific pages.


Especially when Google has many more reliable ways to do profile users (i.e.,  
I very much doubt Google uses Safe Browsing to so): the advertisement it  
displays on most of the Web, the Google+ buttons, the Google fonts most of  
the Web pages download from Google, Google Analytics, which dominates the  
market, etc.


In Firefox's preferences, the check box "Allow Firefox to send technical and  
interaction data to Mozilla" globally enables/disables Mozilla's telemetry.   
heyjoe's bug, filed against the "telemetry" component, pretended the  
opposite.  He had not understood that the settings in about:config depend on  
each other: if datareporting.healthreport.uploadEnabled (the setting that can  
be set from the preferences) is false, no telemetry is sent, whatever the  
values of other entries in about:config that stands for more specific tunings  
of the telemetry component.  That is why the bug was closed with the status  
"WORKSFORME".  Telemetry allows the developers to discover bugs and know how  
the browser is used.  They can then make it evolve the way the community  
wants it to evolve.  https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1424781#c4  
says "[Mozilla] only collect[s] anonymous usage statistics like how often  
Firefox crashes and how quickly the javascript garbage collector runs".  It  
continues:


But you don't have to trust us, you can check:
If you enjoy reading bugs, please browse "Toolkit::Telemetry" for bugs about  
preferences and what they do. If you enjoy reading C++ and JavaScript,

Re: [Trisquel-users] (Not Trisquel-related. Free software related) Free earphones and headphones?

2018-01-13 Thread trisquellist


>mouses

Not about freedom, but ethics nonetheless: For "fair" mouses, have a look at  
https://www.nager-it.de/en (website available in English, German, French,  
Hungarian, and Mandarin).
IIRC, someone described their approach as making sure as much as possible is  
done in countries and companies that already have decent worker rights, as  
opposed to Fairphone's approach of leaving production in countries that don't  
protect workers' rights while trying to make life a little less horrible for  
workers in their production chain than it is for the poor souls in major  
phone vendors' production chains.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Are Big Sacrifice

2018-01-13 Thread Cassandra of Troy

I automatically assumed that you were running a 64 bit machine. If this
is not the case, the 32 bit patch was a slightly lower priority (because
fewer people use 32 bit) so it was just released this morning for Uruk,
which may or may not have a separate repo.

On 01/13/2018 08:05 AM, Cassandra of Troy wrote:
> I am assuming that you are using a 64 bit machine without asking first.
> I don't believe that the 32 bit kernel has been patched yet so my X60s
> and other 32 bit machines are not online right now except to check if
> it's my turn yet.
>
> This must be so frustrating for you.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Are Big Sacrifice

2018-01-13 Thread Cassandra of Troy

I am assuming that you are using a 64 bit machine without asking first.
I don't believe that the 32 bit kernel has been patched yet so my X60s
and other 32 bit machines are not online right now except to check if
it's my turn yet.

This must be so frustrating for you.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Re : Are Big Sacrifice

2018-01-13 Thread Cassandra of Troy

Yes, libreboot does use a different GRUB. Ariella, I don't have much
experience with the libreboot grub and I'm very spottily online right
now but I'll try to poke around and see if I can turn up anything useful
for you if this isn't all resolved the next time I can access the
mailing list or forum. Minifree might also be able to help.

Re: [Trisquel-users] (Trisquel Mini) Loading/buffering into eternity when selecting SMPlayer YouTube Browser in repository


Cheers! :)

Re: [Trisquel-users] Web Browser


Midori

Procedure: Set home page to blank, disable scripts, restart.

Result:

On startup: Zero (0) packets sent.

On opening of preferences only this was shown in tcpdump:

IP pc.49352 > 239.255.255.250.ssdp: UDP, length 132
IP pc.49352 > 239.255.255.250.ssdp: UDP, length 133

but only the first time the browser is started. Shutting down the browser and  
opening preferences again doesn't show such packets in tcpdump (unless the  
machine is rebooted).


Browsing to https://fsf.org/txt shows only communication with fsf.org and no  
packet sending to any other hosts whatsoever.


Additional info: Acid3 test shows 100/100 (with enabled JS). It also has  
quite a few built in extensions, one of them an adblocker which unfortunately  
is not as advanced as my favorite uMatrix and uBO. Another disadvantage I  
notice: it has some issues with color management making images appear  
oversaturated.


A bug noticed: opening https://browserleaks.com/ip causes Midori to crash.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Web Browser


New browser tested:

TOR

Result: Lots of background communication but all of it to subdomains of  
your-server.de over https.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Are Big Sacrifice

2018-01-13 Thread ariella

Linux-libre is what I'm attempting to use, and if you read all my posts  
you'll see that I have already followed all the steps in the documentation  
including the aliasing of grub.cfg to libreboot_grub.cfg for libreboot.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Are Big Sacrifice

2018-01-13 Thread ariella


Autoremove has not been removing them. Tried that many times. :)

[Trisquel-users] Re : Are Big Sacrifice

The GRUB_TIMEOUT variable, in /etc/default/grub, defines the number of  
seconds before booting the default (unless a key is pressed)... except that,  
in your case, the GRUB configuration you edit does not apparently have any  
influence!


If you find where to configure the GRUB you actually use, see  
https://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/grub/html_node/Simple-configuration.html#Simple-configuration  
for other useful simple settings you can can define.

[Trisquel-users] Re : (Trisquel Mini) Loading/buffering into eternity when selecting SMPlayer YouTube Browser in repository

Right-click on the post number (in its upper-right corner, prefixed with  
"#"), copy the link and paste it in your post.

[Trisquel-users] Re : Are Big Sacrifice

It looks like "Trisquel's GRUB" is not used on your system.  Indeed, that is  
not the menu your grub.cfg defines (and that should boot the latest kernel).   
There must be another GRUB somewhere.  Probably something specific to  
Libreboot.

[Trisquel-users] Re : Are Big Sacrifice


It is just that jxself has recently put version 4.14.13 in his repository.

Re: [Trisquel-users] (Trisquel Mini) Loading/buffering into eternity when selecting SMPlayer YouTube Browser in repository

Hey, I do appreciate all the help and guidance here that I have been on the  
receiving end of, but after ADFENO's comment in this  
https://trisquel.info/en/forum/summary-which-youtube-applications-does-what-and-how-free-they-are  
post, I no longer have a desire to get these packages running.


PS. How do I link to comments?

Re: [Trisquel-users] (Trisquel 8) Problems with installing add-ons in Abrowser


"git clone https://github.com/oz123/solarized-mate-terminal.git

cd into the folder and run the script"

- git clone, with that you mean clicking on the button that says "Clone or  
download" and then copy the link that appears?


- what is "cd"? and which folder should I "cd" it into and what script should  
I run? :p

Re: [Trisquel-users] Re : Are Big Sacrifice

2018-01-13 Thread Adonay Felipe Nogueira

I'm not an advanced user, nor a Libreboot user, nor I like to deal with
boot configurations (because I'm a disaster doing so), but here follows
an interesting suggestion:

I suspect this is the step which is remaining (search for "Libreboot"):
https://jxself.org/linux-libre/ .

2018-01-13T01:24:39+0100 lc...@dcc.ufmg.br wrote:
> With that GRUB configuration, the latest kernel should boot by
> default.  I can take a look at your /boot/grub/grub.cfg if you attach
> it to a post but I do not promise anything.  It may be that
> libreboot's things interfere.
>
> Older kernels do not substitute newer kernels because if, for some
> reason, the newer kernel does not boot (or just does not drive some of
> your hardware as well as the older kernel), you are happy to have
> another kernel to select in GRUB's menu.
>
> Talking about the GRUB menu, have you tried to boot the newer kernel
> from "Advanced options for Trisquel" (or something like that).  You
> know about the useless GRUB password and how to learn it or, better,
> get rid of it, don't you?

-- 
- 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] Mini 64-bit on Old Hardware

Hmm.. makes me wonder what I might be running, I'll have a look at the  
gnome-system-monitor. Do you like that better than the KSysGuard and the MATE  
system monitor that comes with Trisquel 8?

Re: [Trisquel-users] Summary of which youtube-applications does what and how free they are


Thanks, I did not know about these things.

Makes me feel kind of sad that I didn't read this before fuzzing with all  
these youtube packages.. anyway, better late than never :)

Re: [Trisquel-users] Web Browser

> Yeah, as I said a truly libre and privacy friendly browser would not come  
with a ton of antiprivacy nonsense and a user should not have to do such a  
hard work to 'clean it up'.


How can something be privacy friendly and come with antiprivacy? :)

> Will do later, I'm curious.

Great. Looking forward to it.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Web Browser