ubuntu -> kali -> lubuntu -> debian -> rhel -> arch -> gentoo + alpine -> alpine (-> openbsd + freebsd)
I consider things not in brackets 100/100 trashes (alpine is 1/2, gentoo is 3/4), in experience (because they don't help me to learn anything, I'd take openbsd on platform that X11 support is broken, for example Alpha, than anything not in brackets on amd64. Of course, that should be a personal machine for learning.)
I have no reason to take you seriously.
GG!
Need to whine more. Maybe I will end up listening to you? And no, you do seem to me like an idiot, because you are arguing one type of knowledge is superior to other. Almost feels like a 4chan script kiddie.
I don't need you to understand that switching to BSD give me more experience and end the privacy race, not end the privacy race by switching to BSD.
This is my experience.
If software is not licensed FOSS, it becomes legally unusable? Are you using trash like ChatGPT to generate these responses?
Re-read the bkav story.
I think you will have to purchase a winrar license even for your school (assume you are the principal).
Then whine more, cry more and deboonk me. You have yet not spoken one sentence that has meaning. Not on Reddit, not on Lemmy. Not one, and I do not expect one.
No, my mission is to remove the privacy trashes.
Big tech aren't much harmed by your "privacy friendly" alternative. But they are harmed when everyone is a kernel developer.
Linus was right. You people really have no clue and understand zilch about computing and security.
You are trying to bring the conversation out of the topic.
Told me to name their innovations and then said something unrelated to the topic.
You already made it clear that “privacy” is “inferior” to “computer science”, one of the stupidest things I have ever heard in my life
As I saw, privacy communities are same in that stupid thought
But it is people's opinion
so you simply hate privacy communities due to your own delusions, blame them, have nothing to do with them yet still probably want to interact with them for some reason that originates back to your delusions. Keep them to yourself.
the privacy communities are much harmful than the big tech
because they remove people's knowledge by instructing people to do privacy & security hardening which does not gain people knowledge.
You need to get more angry and burst a nerve, OR YOU CAN DO THIS… figure out what you want, stop obsessing over what others want, and if you really think you could bring a change, try it. You are writing a lot of weird things. And you lack maturity, no offense. I assume you are young.
Not many people who seek privacy these days are remotely even interested in attaining true privacy or anonymity, but merely circlejerking their choice of software, OS and phone brand on the internet. The understanding of privacy culture goes far deeper than the surface scratching you managed to do, let alone thinking you could resolve things for others. First resolve your inner conflict.
Much naive than a kid who haven't gone to high school.
I thought you have better education than me.
In “privacy” sense nobody cares about some Intel or Microsoft version of Linux or BSD. OpenBSD, NetBSD, most of them are similar enough, and they are not giving you security merely by using them. And I am not even going to get into the discussion of daily driver usability, because I daily Debian and have Windows debloated on dualboot.
They aren't giving me security. Never claimed.
They just teach me what is correct and superior, and that's my experience.
And they concentrate me on programming and computer science, not debloating or hardening !
Please do some serious data archival and preservation for atleast a decade to be eligible to talk on this topic.
Legally.
Unusable.
Yes, I teach, but I also address/teach the philosophy of open versus closed source software in Linux/Windows guide. F(L)OSS is not inherently an ideology or religion you seem to treat it like. It is simply a different way of licensing software code, and at a very basic level it bifurcates into a transparent (freedom) software development culture. Capitalists and advertisers abusing closed source methods to cloak malware/spyware does not make closed sourcing itself fundamentally evil. The intent of those horrible people (and 3 letter agencies) is what counts.
At the time I was mentioning the refusal to have microcode. (if I recall correctly you are the guy who advocate this)
You can whine as much as you want. I have shown everyone what I can do, and have done. Asked no money and formed no harassing cult around it, worked against it.
What you do is writing bullshit "You will not believe this, but Linux and Windows are almost identical today". If the setup is bloated (for guys who doesn't do programming), they are identical. (practical privacy, again?)
It is not doing anything noticeable for security. They just market (mostly) snake oil, and have a bunch of users shilling it from 4chan to reddit to Telegram. Rebranding AOSP features is not a feat by any means. I have talked about this before and I will not address it again.
Linux-hardened and hardened_malloc? hardened_malloc broke firefox.
If you are entering the privacy rabbit hole and treating it like a Discord game cult/community, that is YOUR fault. Many people do that (PrivacyGuides, Techlore or bunch of Linux/FOSS/privacy YouTube channels or Big Tech loving crybully witchhunt cults like GrapheneOS)
What are you saying??? like you sell drugs, yes, that's others' fault to fall into it, but to prevent others to fall, YOU must be killed (destroyed).
Don't drag others down like you are now.
Did learning C teach you privacy and security? No. Did learning networking teach you data structures? No. Did learning arrays teach you calculus? No. Your logic is out of this universe.
IT TEACH ME KNOWLEDGE, AND THAT'S WHAT I WANT!
Many people fall into that privacy and security rabbit hole, while they want to learn COMPUTER SCIENCE!!!
COLLAPSE YOURSELF, PLEASE!
And yes, Linux and Windows are now very identical.
For script kiddies like me in the past, and you now, who doesn't do programming.
I can be on $50 BLU or FirePhone, not have or use Facebook, Discord and Instagram, and be more private and probably more secure than you using Facebook/Instagram/Discord on BSD.
Without the ability to read manual pages and practice what the man page told.
I don't use OpenBSD for security. And yes, FreeBSD can be considered the most insecure operating system, but recently I installed on an idle machine running Windows.
You are an idiot for reducing the argument to using particular OS for ending your “security & privacy race”. It was never a race, and you fell for the * drumroll * privacy circus hook, line and sinker. No, you are inferior for thinking that.
By using BSD, especially OpenBSD, I started thinking what is considered "correct".
Not because considering what is "correct" make me use BSD.
BKAV embedded WinRAR? How is that WinRAR’s fault? Was there a paid contract involved in doing this, like Google Chrome gets slipped into free adware ridden setups? WinRAR has never done such a thing.
No faults here, it is just WinRAR is legally unusable.
I never say every closed source software is evil and bad, infact I advocate the opposite.
If I recall correctly, you are the person who always teach us to use open source software. And do "FOSS android" (actually installing a bunch of "FOSS" trash/applications with adb(?) ). If you aren't, please correct me.
TL;DR you fell for the privacy circus and are blaming everyone, and for some reason came to me, despite me preventing people from being cliffhanged into fake privacy circuses. You need to process and think everything. These cults/circuses you fall for are not some journey, but a NEET pastime.
You are the fake privacy circuses. But techlore and GrapheneOS community and all other community are the same.
See what you and your community posts.
I considered you guys debating about GrapheneOS's use of proprietary Google stuff and Google hardware are a way to attract user. With bad intention, like parties fighting for their own power in an multiparty system. GrapheneOS itself at least is much more secure (in exploit mitigations) by creating privacy through security, not creating security through privacy. And using Google's hardware is equally not private as any other manufacture's hardware.
Conclusion:
I think the OpenBSD crowd is a bunch of masturbating monkeys, in that they make such a big deal about concentrating on security to the point where they pretty much admit that nothing else matters to them.
This should now point to privsec.dev, privacy guides, r/privatelife, r/privacy, GrapheneOS community and any other "private" or "degoogled" android community. Since OpenBSD is much more usable, but the streams of privacy tools is probably not usable by anyone.
And you have shown you don't care about anything except privacy in your post.
I saw the clients are open source, but what about the server??
Anyways, if you put your data on others' hard drive, NOTHING will guarantee the data can be erased on demand.
But well, when the clients is open source, PGP-encrypted messages are mostly safe.
Why there are so much VPNs here
How can you think it is a good practice.
There are a lot of pretend experts these days
You and me too. We both recommend what is trending to us.
But I have got into OpenBSD, and you haven't.
There is a compatibility layer (not emulator) called WINE, which you can use to run almost any Windows program natively on Linux without issues
WITHOUT ISSUE???
It require the kernel to be modified. OpenBSD explicitly does not support this. But I think Linux do. It reduce Linux's security by increasing complexity, and thus, increasing bugs.
Running Windows binaries natively on Windows should be more stable and secure. Perhaps even if you enable Windows's MANDACTORY_ASLR
About the word FOSS - Free and Open source software - this word is superfluous. The word "free software" already did the job. Oh, this is a GNU-sponsored program to replace the word "free software", since free software must be freely used, modified and redistributed. Copyleft does not allow modified software to be redistributed, since it require derivative works to fall under that copyleft license.
Then I cannot do static linking against a GPL-licensed library without my software also fall under GPL. But this is their intention.
Sorry, I'm exaggerating on this.
But did you heard about libressl developers on openssl code?
What a lack of documentation. On BSDs we didn't suffer that.
BSD is an operating system. It diverged into FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD.