Right, because the only alternative to using spaghetti old code is making your own, not using one of the many actively maintained free software.
Among many others you'd easily find if you give up on the hivemind of taking the most popular approach.
From the producers of genocide, we present ecocide.
Smart phones and their consequences have been a disaster for the human race.
Backporting security and bug fixes is a responsible and reasonable measure taken by any software that actually respects its users ESPECIALLY when a new breaking update is released. You failed at bullying a stranger with valid concerns. Try to bring reason with you next time before you decide to be rude and condescending.
I keep seeing this idea everywhere. Buy a Google phone and install another OS.
It is completely absurd to fund the exact adversaries you are running away from, while consuming, without contributing a dime, merely a piece of free software. (It is only a small piece of freedom because none of the hardware is free, and some binary blobs [incl. potential backdoors] will still be present in the alternative OS no matter which one it is.)
This is unsustainable, terrible, damaging advice. Stop giving it.
73 million for a few years of a defederated Mastodon fork. Yeah, totally not fraud.
How about you read the one link you are commenting on before asking for another? It is in the article.
I am aware of the difference in philosophy taken by both Gnome and KDE, but would you mind elaborating on the 'assholes' bit?
They "don't" allow it, that's how licenses work.
I keep seeing comments like these on source available nonfree software, but it really doesn't factor in the fact that older software is NOT going to be used due to bugs, features missing, technical debt, secuity vulnerabilities, etc. So unless it is forked (i.e: OpenTofu), it is as good as useless for everyone but hobbyists.
That fuck them mentality won't get you anywhere. Your phone is a communications device. You need others to be using free protocols and software, otherwise your phone will be useless.
Am I the only one thinking how problematic that product is?
I guess 'think of the children' only comes up when governments want to ban end-to-end encryption or ask for ID when viewing porn, but everyone is dandy with addictive products advertisements targeted at children such as the one in the meme, gambling in video games, toy companies exploiting children, and more...
view more: next ›
unexpectedteapot
joined 2 years ago
Pretty sure the Californian authority is not a copper DSL religious cult. If you actually read the article, the regulations they are citing are built for vulnerable communities to protect them from for-profit utility providers from cutting them off by shutting down old but only available way to provide internet to the people.
Wireless is not a fix-all solution, and can be unreliable and bandwidth limited for dense areas.
This message is sent to you by someone whose utility provider decided to do exactly what you wish and now is stuck with wireless towers that completely go down if there's any heightened usage (tourism, people moving in, and so on) or pretty much randomly (and since the infrastructure is not built yet, the company's nearest branch is nowhere near me), if you move too quickly, go to a room the tower doesn't properly reach (yes can be fixed, but now the burden of cost is on the person not the company), and many more issues that arise when 'wireless towers' are provided instead of actual internet cables that might be slower, older and more expensive for the provider but much more reliable, stable and actually working most of the time.