A few years ago people were talking about convergence of phone/desktop, i.e. you plug your phone into a big screen and keyboard and it’s now your desktop computer.
Mobile apps are shit for that. Sure, my phone is powerful enough to browse internet, play video and music but on desktop with mouse/kb it’s just weird and funky. And I’m not even talking about any productivity software which is straight impossible.
Not for the seedbox, but for the personal always on VPN I would def prefer something nearshore.
Why? I refuse to believe there’s no location in SA with a decent internet and without DMCA enforcement.
Be ware of using VPN if you want spanish content and wanna join a private tracker; all spanish private tracker ban the use of VPNs
What’s the rationale for that?
deleted by creator
That is conveniently left out of the speck. Attestation server may require signed binary on a client system, it may require whatever it wants really, because why not? It’s a website who decides to trust attestation server or not.
They aren’t proposing a way for browsers to DRM page contents and prevent modifications from extensions.
And yet, this proposal would make it easier to do so.
Basically, it would allow websites to only serve users who comply with website requirements (i.e., no extensions, no ad blockers, only Chrome-based, whatever) whatever these requirements are.
You (your browser) go to a website, example.com, which requires attestation. So you must go to an attestation server and attest your device/browser combo (by telling the attestation server whatever information it requires). If the attestation server thinks you are trustworthy, it gives you an integrity token that you pass to example.com, and then you can see example.com. The website knows which attestation server issued your integrity token, so you can’t create your own.
So no extra software means no attestation server would attest you; means you can’t see example.com. End of story. It’s the same as the current “your browser is not supported” window, only you can’t get around it by changing the user agent.
As usual with these initiatives, bullshit is spread across different specs - this spec by itself implies that any number of attestation servers can exist, and they can check whatever they want, and no browser should be excluded, etc., etc., but practical implementation would probably check installed extensions, etc.
I don’t know. I would like to subscribe to someone on Threads from Mastodon (since both are Twitter alternatives), if they don’t have Mastodon account (which let’s be honest they probably don’t). Zuck does not get any of my data (besides what’s available publicly anyway). If Threads decides to go full EEE, I’ll stop getting updates from people on Threads, same as I don’t get updates from people on IG right now. I think proliferation of ActivityPub protocol would be the greatest advantage.
Moreover, I think we should follow the email architecture - I might use i.e. Proton Mail, but it does not prevent me from sending emails to Gmail, which I think is a bad provider, who collects a lot of user data. In fact if Proton Mail forbade sending email to Gmail I would be really displeased about that.
The goal is to allow people to choose where they want to go and ActivityPub is what can help with that, unlike blocking Threads.
Gutting defeated/ousted manager’s projects is an obligatory and unavoidable ritual in corporate environment. Competent or convenient employees are pulled into other teams, pesky/unconvenient ICs are fired since everything can be pinned on the loser. Projects are often dismantled - even profitable ones to remove any possible foothold for a comeback. Shit, now I want to write a corpo book but styled like high school biology textbook.