• 0 Posts
  • 44 Comments
Joined 1 年前
cake
Cake day: 2024年3月30日

help-circle

  • Absolutely. Companies have every right to control what tools are authorized to use on their hardware, and what touches their data or users data. It could be as complex as security or as simple as don’t use a competing service, but it all makes sense. Don’t tell me how use my stuff and I won’t tell you how to use yours.

    If it’s BYOD then that’s another multiple layers of cans of worms not worth getting into.



  • I would probably argue they are the same in terms of security and privacy. Privacy communities tend to disfavor Proton because its all eggs in one basket, and also for political reasons. Both of those are subjective to your personal threat/privacy profile.

    Its true that a single point of failure is more risk than separate services, but that fact doesn’t undermine their security on a technical level, and has nothing to do with privacy. As for the political, yes it’s something to watch but nothing wrong has been done. They are set up as a non profit with checks and measures in place to prevent corruption from happening. I’m OK with different points of view and having different points of view on a board is a good thing.



  • I’m no ghost, not even close. Be careful though, “what’s the point?” Is essentially the question everybody asks at every phase of that iceberg diagram.

    A possible answer to your question though, is that even if the state doesn’t know or care about him today that might change tomorrow.

    That’s not my threat profile but it’s a valid one.


  • Moving to GrapheneOS doesn’t have to be full bore. While it obviously wouldn’t be as private, you could run google services sandboxed. That restricts google quite a bit rather than giving it full rights to everything on your phone. Other features you can take advantage of are granular permissions per app and the ability to easily turn things on and off (such as mic, camera, location), restrictions to contacts, restriction to files/folders, etc… Youd be amazed how much you can clean up your exposure even with google services running. But yes, you’d need to give up using google apps like calendar for any of it to do any good.



  • I’m fully in support of LibreOffice and the fact that it can do a lot for free. However it is far from an enterprise product.

    I’m still waiting for anybody to make a true competitor to Excel. There’s some decrnt spreadsheet software but there’s really no comparison to the functionality of Excel. Even Google sheets is a distant second.

    My point is, when there are power users involved LibreOffice just won’t cut it.








  • There’s something about simplicity that is underated.

    Technically my first ditro was SuSE a loooong time ago but I didn’t stick with it. Then back when Ubuntu became he new hit thing I tried that, but again didn’t stick with it.

    I have now loaded up Mint and that’s the one I’m running with. Mind you, all distros have come a long way since my prior Linux dealings but Mint is the one to make me permanently switch.


  • I agree with you, but there’s two sides of the coin.

    I would rather pay for a finished product that is good. Sure I can download Linux for free, but I’d rather pay for it. I’d rather support teams that are putting out a product to ensure it is the best it can be and be continually maintained.

    FOSS doesn’t have to be free. Nor should it be.

    However when projects get organized like that they become organizations. Organizations become businesses. And that’s fine. Let’s support them so they can eat and feed their kids.

    So it begs the question, if I feel that way about them is it fine to support non open source orgs and software? Of course it is.

    So it basically comes down to the complaining that the software is not good enough.

    Of course “good enough” isn’t binary, so if its on the threshold of usability I use it and if its severely lacking then I don’t. No big deal.

    If its free, then there is no reason to complain regardless. If you’re paying for it, I think your opinion has a bit more weight. Of course there’s still a scale. If it’s so far removed from usability then I just don’t buy it. Windows is a good example of that. But if its close, voicing your opinion that you want certain features is more than fine. It doesn’t remove your support. Wanting Affinity on Linux is a fine desire. If they haven’t said they aren’t going to then asking isn’t a complaint. It’s a want.

    I use Affinity because its the best solution I can find. I would love to have it on Linux. Maybe one day it will happen, but I’m not holding my breath. Supporting Affinity in hopes that they make it better for me (for my preferred platform) is OK, because I’m finding a way to use the product that suits me today. If that way becomes too much hassle tomorrow, I’ll move on. But if they make it easy for me to stay with them then I won’t. But either way, supporting Gimp won’t make it Affinity. It’ll just make Gimp a better Gimp.

    I guess it boils down to, do you support something that isn’t what you want in hopes it becomes what you want it to be or do you support something that is exactly what you want, hoping it will go to where you want it?

    Sorry I rambled on there (I’m tired). I do agree with you but there’s a counter point I also agree with. I don’t think they are exclusive.