It’s not about the google vibes, it’s that this thing could be standardized and used by several programs and websites.

here’s an example. with google’s integrity system, most phones can not go through attestation. an exception is phones that can run GrapheneOS. but for apps that require attestation, the developers need to change their app so that it accepts valid attestations of systems that use the GrapheneOS key. such apps can decide to keep only accepting google approved systems.

so far it looks like this will work similarly enough that software you run will be able to be picky about what distribution you use.

if unprivileged software can ask the integrity verifier component which private key is used as the integrity root, or what rules does the verifier keep, then it can be used by commercial software (and web browsers) to decide whether they allow running themselves on your computer (or whether you are allowed to watch netflix, or log in to the bank’s or the government’s website)

an arch user doesn’t know that!!

so, that further information is the kernel’s version number. it helps to keep some older versions. but you didn’t set it up to include the version in the filename.

és egyébként bojler eladó. processzorra cserélném.

that will help to make the terminal slower!

http? really?

better yet: criticizing Debian for the instability of Kali

how does that relate to privacy?

selective enforcement could give them way to give you effectively a life sentence for breaking this and that law

that sounds good until laws are weaponized against freedom and normal people

but dont even go that far. you are now a criminal for saying something mean to a public figure on the internet, for jaywalking, for making a mistake in reporting your taxes, …

the same as with 23andme and other genetic analysis services

It’s not as fancy. No graphs, blinking lights, paneled layout.

apparently it has it all

https://lemmy.today/comment/20055580

as I understood you are complaining that they don’t have a package manager. they do, but not for system software.

you did not read the article

plaintext is the unencrypted form of data. encryption produces ciphertext. encrypting the same data with the same key twice results in the same ciphertext, unless additional steps were taken to insert additional data that does not match (like a nonce) to the plaintext

the way it works is that the veracrypt container basically contains 2 encrypted partitions. if it can’t decrypt the first one with the password, it will try the second one, but always pretend to try both so that the time it takes to unlock it does not give it away. by writing to either, you risk overwriting data in the other one (except that you can input both the hidden and main partition passwords and it will make sure to keep the hidden partition unaffected), but otherwise both partitions are fully functional

deleted by creator

or just the individual characteristics and flaws of the lens/sensor/postprocessing software, some of which can be unique per device, and potentially comparable to other photos made with it.

or any repair show that uses the brand specific diagnostic software, pirated or not

They aren’t encrypted, hence why I never said they were.

you did, just with different words. without encryption and with centralized servers how would this claim of yours be the case?

If it’s a private group they don’t know what’s happening.

you know, trust and safety teams aren’t looking at the content with the apps when they look for harmful content. they have access to better moderation tools with access to the database, where the messages are readable to them because of the lack of end to end encryption.

the thread is visible here, just a single comment was deleted