First of all, don't waste your precious time enjoying life with privacy worrying and fear. It's just not worth it.

I don't know why, but I get the impression the device you are struggling to make more private is a phone. If that's the case, the extent to which you can make things work is indeed very limited, so don't try to push it too hard.

You could use a tool like a firewall to have a more high-level control over all apps, like blocking them all and only allowing a few.

This may be less overwhelming than trying to block and contain each app individually. Now, you will still need to allow some Google stuff to have a Google phone work properly (to use the Play Store for example). If you want to go further, I'd suggest trying another OS other than Android, but that may make your phone even less compatible with what you are relying on, so it may be a better idea to instead try it on an old phone first.

On a PC, you have more freedom. Instead of trying to block everything from Google, for instance, you can rely on a separate browser profile (or Firefox Containers if that's inconvenient) for things that really need Google (e.g. Meet, work/school using Google Apps, whatever) and in your main browser profile you can rely on alternatives. For example, instead of trying to access YouTube behind a Google blocking extension, you could use Invidious or a dedicated app like FreeTube.

I hope you can feel more at ease with the sense of being watched and tracked online, but remember that's not worth loosing your best moments for if it ends up just causing more distress to you.

I think you have a point there, but the reasons why Mint does not ship a streamlined version may be simply because the maintainers don't want to bother with a whole different context to build, document and support.

I do think there would be value in a less "batteries included" Mint. I disagree with people in this thread who claim the "whole purpose" of Mint is all the stuff it packs, because it goes far beyond the essentials. Mint develops a lot of GUIs for the user to be able to configure the system. I think just these plus the in-house Mint core apps would make for a sweet, lightweight and less bloated system that would have real appeal, but that would also mean more work for the Linux Mint team and perhaps it wouldn't really mean much for their audience.

That's interesting. I was looking up "Lemmy Terms of Service" for comparison after getting that quote from the Reddit ToS and could not find anything for Lemmy.ml. Now after you mentioned it, looking on my Mastodon instance, nothing either, just a privacy policy. That is indeed kinda weird. Some instances do have their own ToS though. At least something stating a sublicense for distribution should be there for protection of people running instances in locations where it's relevant.

the claimants were set back because they’ve been asked to prove the connection between AI output and their specific inputs

I mean, how do you do that for a closed-source model with secretive training data? As far as I know, OpenAI has admitted to using large amounts of copyrighted content, numberless books, newspaper material, all on the basis of fair use claims. Guess it would take a government entity actively going after them at this point.

Yeah, their assumption though is you don't? Neither attribution nor sharealike, not even full-on all-rights-reserved copyright is being respected. Anything public goes and if questions are asked it's "fair use". If the user retains CC BY-SA over their content, why is giving a bunch of money to StackOverflow entitling OpenAI to use it all under whatever terms they settled on? Boggles me.

Now, say, Reddit Terms of Service state clearly that by submitting content you are giving them the right to "a worldwide, royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, transferable, and sublicensable license to use, copy, modify, adapt, prepare derivative works of, distribute, store, perform, and display Your Content and any name, username, voice, or likeness (...) in all media formats and channels now known or later developed anywhere in the world." Speaks volumes on why alternatives (like Lemmy) to these platforms matter.

Recently did something similar and yeah it seems Mint, specially LMDE in my case, is a great fit for such cases. It's on that sweet spot between being too bare and too bloated.

Perhaps Firefly? It is meant for personal finances but considerably complex still. I am not sure if it does invoicing though.

Edit: This should give you a more precise idea of how fitting it might be: https://docs.firefly-iii.org/explanation/more-information/what-its-not/#business-finances-small-business-accounting-payroll-management

I'm not the biggest fan of VBox either, it's just very popular and full of sequential "wizards" to guide the user along the process of creating VMs, so it might be one way to get started. I'd much rather work with QEMU though.

I think you might like DIstroSea. If you'd like to persist your experiments, then likely learning how to emulate systems with QEMU or VirtualBox (the latter if you'd like a friendlier GUI-led experience, the former if you want to go full-CLI virtualization). QEMU is great in how lightweight and easy to create and discard self-contained VM disk images can be.

have a principled objection to a service financed by public money forcing people to install and execute proprietary non-free software on their own hardware

You are on spot there, but sadly even legislators are far from understanding the reasons why this matters so much, let alone the general public.

Whatever security policy they have, it shouldn't require you installing a random executable to your system. And it was flawed enough that it didn't care to give your device access.

And by the way, it's so awesome you carry an ethernet cable around!!

I think the easy answer to that is "because it is not as trivial as forking a small app that could run off of a git repo", it's a whole operating system involving a lot of infrastructure and a huge community around it. It might get forked, but people fight probably because they see value in what exists and would rather try and advocate for whatever direction they believe is best. Those who would disagree are not very different, just passive.

An even more trivial alternative is settling for "whatever the founder wants" and seeing the ability to fork as the final justification for this mentality. This is a lot less work, but also can amount to doing nothing, even if shitty decisions are being made. Even if that is your stance, you will have to fight for it. The alternative is everyone just sit idly and pretend not to have opinions. I'd much rather embrace the chaos that comes with collaboration and let it find proper processes to manifest.

I understand that and it is indeed a good thing to publicly license your work rather than keep that to yourself. Still, no matter how virtuous one's actions are, that does not mean the people who come to deposit their time and work for a project should accept everything that person does simply because they started it.

People are entitled to argue about the project they participate in, and that is even more true for open source software, where the contributions of the community eventually become much greater than any single human can accomplish. I really do not understand this mentality of "this person created it, therefore if you don't like any of their decision suck it up or go make your own fork", it is very narrow and a horrible way to conduct anything, really anything, much less a collaborative project.