Do you have access to Signal servers to verify your claims by any chance?
That's not how it works. The signal protocol is designed in a way that the server can't have access to your message contents if the client encrypts them properly. You're supposed to assume the server might be compromised at any time. The parts you actually need to verify for safe communication are:
Yeah, that section is bad.
For one, it's has classic vibe "if you want to keep the nazis out, you're the one who's exclusionary".
But also, how is refusing to engage on a platform "shutting out a significant portion of [the] community"? That sounds backwards to me. Blocking people from engaging with Debian on its own platforms would be shutting them out. The implication in the article is that Debian is obligated to be unconditionally present on every social platform its users might be on.
Comparing pregnant women who drink to men in prison as equally violent individuals?
Straight up adding pregnant women who smoke to pregnant women who drink alcohol to women who get late stage abortions with no concern that an individual might belong to more than one group?
Removing fathers who drank before conception from the equation entirely with the justification that an article called it less harmful, but clearly not harmless, which is the opposite of what he did when he put number of drinkers and convicted criminals in the same equation.
Go there & argue with guy if you are capable of showing a more accurate math
I'm not going to argue with that dipshit because it's total waste of time. And so is arguing with you. I only commented for the benefit of other users who might scroll by without noticing the absolutely ridiculous evidence you cited, and get trapped into taking your position at face value.
Bro, no way you're not a troll. I clicked on the 2nd link to see what the source is. It's a guy using copilot to calculate percentage of women smoking and drinking during pregnancy, as well as late abortions, then does completely arbitrary math to conclude that women are more violent. If I wrote a parody of a person abusing stats to prove stupid points I would never have managed to make it as ridiculous as this.
KDE and Hyprland have it already apparently, as well as the embedded gamescope session. It still needs to be implemented by apps/games as well, though. According to this mpv and games running on recent Proton versions have HDR support.
HDR means better contrast and colors if your monitor supports it.
The news in the OP specifically mean that the protocol is finalized, but you still have to wait for it to get implemented.
Most of Proton code is Wine. So basically if you have Wine in your system, library dependencies are not an issue anymore, apart from DLLs that some games require
If I have wine on my system and try to run steam-managed proton without any sort of runtime or container, then I'm running proton on different versions of libraries than the ones it was compiled for and tested on. Proton also has additional components which might mean additional dependencies, so your statement is false to begin with.
Why are they doing a fork instead of contributing?
The fork is open source. As far as I know, some contributions do get merged into wine. Valve is also funding work from Collabora which is contributed directly into wine. They cannot contribute the entirety of proton to wine because wine does not want all their contributions. This is a very common situation to arise when someone wants to use an open source project but their goals don't align.
But I expect it will be easier to push back on using containerization in Proton, than making Valve allow us such control
Valve is never going to rip out a solution that is working great for them and risk causing issues for customers for no good reason. Thinking that Valve are more likely to remove containerization than they are to allow you to modify the container is, frankly, delusional. It's also completely irrelevant, as I've already said. If Valve wants to "fuck us up" then they're going to do it. Steam is a proprietary piece of software that supports DRM for all your (also proprietary) games, which are stored on the cloud. You have no control over your games, but containers have nothing to do with it. And if they did, and Valve really wanted to pull a trick on us, asking them to remove the containers would make even less sense...
Just follow the instructions here. Snapshots do not recursively traverse subvolumes. So putting the swapfile into its own subvolume means it will be excluded from any snapshots of / . The command should also set No_COW which also implicitly turns of compression if you use that.
I'll repeat what another user said because it's important. If you want filesystem encryption you also want swap encryption. Otherwise any data is liable to get leaked by being written to swap.
The issue is that even if you choose a hosting service outside the US, they might choose to block your content anyway in order to comply with US regulations and avoid legal trouble.
Are you contradicting yourself later by conceding (flawed as it may be) it fit “a very minimal definition of democracy”?
What part are you referring to? This?
So if you mean democracy in a very literal and minimal sense, that the people have some sort of power through their vote, that’s technically still going on.
Cause that not the same context. One is responding to the "100-years tradition of upkeeping democracy against major non-democratic players" claim and the other is talking about the USA political system as it exists right now. These are not just referring to different periods; but the former is not even asking whether democracy exists in the USA. It's asking whether the US has a long tradition of fighting for democracy against its major enemies. That's why I didn't just mention just the lack of voting rights for minorities, but also stuff like violently interfering in other countries' politics. The sentences seem inconsistent to you because you took out every bit of context.
Do good, objective definitions vary by time & culture? Seems problematic.
Yes they do vary. One could argue objective definitions don't exist in the first place. It's not problematic, it's a good thing. If definitions didn't vary by time, black people would still be slaves and women would not have the right to vote. It is our changing definition of who "the people" of a country are that changed the rights afforded to those people. And the fact that even the most fundamental words of the most minimal definition are not objective and unchanging is why you cannot come up with a single universally accepted definition. I mean, if you think you have one, why don't you share it?
Your encryption key can be stored encrypted in the cloud. This isn't a fundamentally bad thing, but they should allow better protection than the short pins they allowed last time I checked.