This includes sideloaded apps.
This exactly. I have a FOSS app called VirtualXPosed installed (although I never use it anymore), which creates a "virtual android" in which apps can be installed and be manipulated in ways that would normally require root, despite me not having it on my phone.
Despite having "play protect" disabled, google still constantly sends me notifications about it being harmful.
There are exactly 3 types of phoronix commenters:
- Trolls
- People falling for the trolling
- Professionals working at intel, red hat, etc who use that site as some kind of communications board for some strange, unknown reason
also as a bonus question, why does every IDE seem to require you to configure every single option before it can run code
What IDE's have you tried?
Kate (and vscode) aren't really IDE's, they're more like extremely extensible text editors. You can make them IDE's, but they dob't come like that out of the box.
On the other hands, actual IDE's often have the inbuilt capability to install and manage the programming language related software.
Ubuntu in WSL comes with systemd enabled. Debian doesn't, and you have to enable it yourself.
That's why I chose to have people use Ubuntu in WSL, despite the other downsides. One less step to setup a Linux environment on Windows makes the process smoother.
https://help.kagi.com/orion/faq/faq.html#oss
We're working on it! We've started with some of our components and intend to open more in the future.
The idea that "open-source = trustworthy" only goes so far. For example, the same tech company that offers a popular open-source browser also has the largest ad/tracking network in history, with that browser playing a significant role in it. Another company with a closed-source browser (using WebKit like Orion) is on the forefront of privacy awareness and technologies in its products.
So, does anyone here remember when all chromium browsers had a secret api that sent extra data to google? Brave, Opera, and Edge got hit by this one, but I think Vivaldi dodged it. They all removed this after they found out, but still...
When it comes to things like browsers, due to the sheer complexity and difficulty to truly audit chromium, I don't really consider chromium to be "open source" in the same sense as many other apps. Legally, you can see and edit the code. But in practice, it's impossible to audit all of it, and the development is controlled by a single corporation who puts secrets in it, or removes features that harm their interests (manifest v3). Personally, I consider Minecraft Java to be closer to open source than chromium is.
To say that:
The idea that "open-source = trustworthy" only goes so far
is really just a cop-out and excuse for not being transparent with their code and what they are doing.
Stallman doesn't seem to get that pedophilia is wrong because of the hierarchy of power, and the power imbalances between older/younger people, not because of some inherent wrongness about being attracted to a prepubescent person. This is shown by how he condemns some pedophilia, but is accepting of 12+/past puberty. (I despise this logic, because it would also make gay sex and sodomy wrong, as well).
I find this deeply ironic, because his primary issue with proprietary software is the way that it gives developers levels of power over users. From his article Why Open Source Misses the Point
But software can be said to serve its users only if it respects their freedom. What if the software is designed to put chains on its users? Then powerfulness means the chains are more constricting, and reliability that they are harder to remove.
You would expect someone who is so in tune with the hierarchies that appear with software developers, publishers, and users, to also see those same hierarchies echoed in relationships between people of vastly different ages, but instead, we get this. I'm extremely disappointed.
These failures to understand hierarchy and power, are exactly why Stallman shouldn't be in a position of power. Leaders should continually prove that they understand hierarchy and the effects of their actions on those below them. Someone who doesn't understand how their power could affect another, shouldn't be a leader.
As a someone who has used both Arch, and Debian, neither has less or more bugs.
Debian has the same bugs, over the period of their stable release, and Arch has changing bugs (like a new set every update lol).
Yes, Arch is going to get a lot more features. But it comes at the cost of "instability". Which is not so much a lack of reliability but instead, how much the software changes. I remember a firefox bug that caused a crash when I attempt to drag bookmarks in my bookmarks bar around, which lasted for like a week — then it went away.
The idea behind projects like Debian, is that for an entity that needs stability, you can simply work around the bugs, since you always know what and where they are. (Well, the actual intent is that entities write patches and submit them to Debian to fix the bugs but no one does that).
Another thing: Debian Stable has more up to date packages than Ubuntu 20.04, and Ubuntu 22.04. This happens because Ubuntu "freezes" a Sid version, and those packages don't get major updates for a while. So often, the latest Debian stable has newer packages than the older Ubuntu releases.
And before you start whining - again - about how you are fixing bugs, let me remind you about the build failures you had on big-endian machines because your patches had gotten ZERO testing outside your tree.
As far as I know, the Linux Foundation does not provide testing infrastructure to it's developers. Instead, corporations are expected to use their massive amount of resources to test patches across a variety of cases before contributing them.
Yes, I think Kent is in the wrong here. Yes, I think Kent should find a sponsor or something to help him with testing and making his development more stable (stable in the sense of fewer changes over time, rather than stable as in reliable).
But, I kinda dislike how the Linux Foundation has a sort of... corporate centric development. It results in frictions with individual developers, as shown here.
Over all of the people Linus has chewed out over the years, I always wonder how many of them were independent developers with few resources trying to figure things out on their own. I've always considered trying to learn to contribute, but the Linux kernel is massive. Combined with the programming pieces I would have to learn, as well as the infrastructure and ecosystem (mailing list, patch system, etc), it feels like it would be really infeasible to get into without some kind of mentor or dedicated teacher.
Aw yeah! This is where my knowledge of absurdly good but extremely niche games comes in. I think I'll make multiple replies to this comment.
Think enter the gungeon combined with superhot, but simplified a lot. It's a turn based bullet hell, and an excellent arcade game playable in the browser.
EDIT: I'd also like to take this oppurtunity to talk about flashpoint. Flashpoint is a massive archive of basically every flash game and animation, and you can even play them again.
However, in addition to flash projects, I also noticed that flashpoint also archives HTML/HTML5 games... but only a subset of them. Although flashpoint's primary purpose still is as a flash archive, it can also be used as a curated list of HTML5 games.
Here is a website that lets you search the flashpoint database
What? Github is not open source.
And plenty of people have issues with Github: https://sfconservancy.org/GiveUpGitHub/
their entire hosting site is, itself, proprietary and/or trade-secret software
