cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/32830968

I stopped distributing Linux Mint to the low-tech users who I support roughly ~10 years ago when the project jailed their docs in tor-hostile Cloudflare websites (e.g. readthedocs.io, IIRC).

A recent general search for info on getting a piece of hardware working on linux led to forums.linuxmint.com (the query had no relevance to Mint specifically). This website uses #Sucuri for elitist tor-hostile gatekeeping. There is no action for me to take since I already quit supporting Mint, other than perhaps to ask others in my local linux support group to also drop Mint support because our users should not face a choice between software freedom and privacy. Certainly when I am asked to install Mint for someone, I will refuse and try to steer them to Debian, perhaps with Cinnamon.

Screenshot attached. Not sure how long linuxmint has been using Sucuri for crude IP reputation discrimination, but note that the Debian project that feeds the Mint project demonstrates respect for people’s privacy. Mint adds value in some ways, but at the same time worsens a good distro by jailing information.

This is not a “something is better than nothing” scenario. It’s actually destructive. When you host a discriminatory access-restricted forum, you create an attraction for useful info and simultaneously become an obstacle to the information that would otherwise find a better host. If forums.linuxmint.com did not exist, the discussion would still occur somewhere and it would have a chance at occurring in an open access venue.

cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/32830968

I stopped distributing Linux Mint to the low-tech users who I support roughly ~10 years ago when the project jailed their docs in tor-hostile Cloudflare websites (e.g. readthedocs.io, IIRC).

A recent general search for info on getting a piece of hardware working on linux led to forums.linuxmint.com (the query had no relevance to Mint specifically). This website uses #Sucuri for elitist tor-hostile gatekeeping. There is no action for me to take since I already quit supporting Mint, other than perhaps to ask others in my local linux support group to also drop Mint support because our users should not face a choice between software freedom and privacy. Certainly when I am asked to install Mint for someone, I will refuse and try to steer them to Debian, perhaps with Cinnamon.

Screenshot attached. Not sure how long linuxmint has been using Sucuri for crude IP reputation discrimination, but note that the Debian project that feeds the Mint project demonstrates respect for people’s privacy. Mint adds value in some ways, but at the same time worsens a good distro by jailing information.

This is not a “something is better than nothing” scenario. It’s actually destructive. When you host a discriminatory access-restricted forum, you create an attraction for useful info and simultaneously become an obstacle to the information that would otherwise find a better host. If forums.linuxmint.com did not exist, the discussion would still occur somewhere and it would have a chance at occurring in an open access venue.

When simply visiting the landing page for discuss.tchncs.de, the whole page is full of posts in communities that are hosted on lemmy.world and sh.itjust.works.

It’s a bit foolish because if someone wants to see posts for those communities, they would visit those nodes. If you visit discuss.tchncs.de the main timeline should show you a local timeline.

It would be sensible if someone is logged in to discuss.tchncs.de, in which case their settings would have effect. But it does not make sense to fill the page with foreign posts by non-local users to non-logged-in visitors. There is no user account and no community that traces to discuss.tchncs.de on the landing page.

Of course a visitor can click local, if they are familiar with Lemmy, but all is a shit default.

cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/32830968

I stopped distributing Linux Mint to the low-tech users who I support roughly ~10 years ago when the project jailed their docs in tor-hostile Cloudflare websites (e.g. readthedocs.io, IIRC).

A recent general search for info on getting a piece of hardware working on linux led to forums.linuxmint.com (the query had no relevance to Mint specifically). This website uses #Sucuri for elitist tor-hostile gatekeeping. There is no action for me to take since I already quit supporting Mint, other than perhaps to ask others in my local linux support group to also drop Mint support because our users should not face a choice between software freedom and privacy. Certainly when I am asked to install Mint for someone, I will refuse and try to steer them to Debian, perhaps with Cinnamon.

Screenshot attached. Not sure how long linuxmint has been using Sucuri for crude IP reputation discrimination, but note that the Debian project that feeds the Mint project demonstrates respect for people’s privacy. Mint adds value in some ways, but at the same time worsens a good distro by jailing information.

This is not a “something is better than nothing” scenario. It’s actually destructive. When you host a discriminatory access-restricted forum, you create an attraction for useful info and simultaneously become an obstacle to the information that would otherwise find a better host. If forums.linuxmint.com did not exist, the discussion would still occur somewhere and it would have a chance at occurring in an open access venue.

I stopped distributing Linux Mint to the low-tech users who I support roughly ~10 years ago when the project jailed their docs in tor-hostile Cloudflare websites (e.g. readthedocs.io, IIRC).

A recent general search for info on getting a piece of hardware working on linux led to forums.linuxmint.com (the query had no relevance to Mint specifically). This website uses #Sucuri for elitist tor-hostile gatekeeping. There is no action for me to take since I already quit supporting Mint, other than perhaps to ask others in my local linux support group to also drop Mint support because our users should not face a choice between software freedom and privacy. Certainly when I am asked to install Mint for someone, I will refuse and try to steer them to Debian, perhaps with Cinnamon.

Screenshot attached. Not sure how long linuxmint has been using Sucuri for crude IP reputation discrimination, but note that the Debian project that feeds the Mint project demonstrates respect for people’s privacy. Mint adds value in some ways, but at the same time worsens a good distro by jailing information.

This is not a “something is better than nothing” scenario. It’s actually destructive. When you host a discriminatory access-restricted forum, you create an attraction for useful info and simultaneously become an obstacle to the information that would otherwise find a better host. If forums.linuxmint.com did not exist, the discussion would still occur somewhere and it would have a chance at occurring in an open access venue.

I scanned an envelope which had a dot matrix 4-state barcode by the postal service. It did not appear on the /bilevel/ scan. So I tried very low thresholds (the point at which light gray is treated as either black or white). The threshold needed to retain the fluorescent(†) barcode is so low that black text on the same scan becomes too dirty for OCR to work.

The US postal service scans (all?) envelopes and thus has records of who is sending mail to who. (Do other countries do this?) Anyway, I wonder how we might counter the privacy intrusion. What if the return address on an envelope is printed in fluorescent orange.. would the return address be suppressed from envelope scans? IIUC, they would have to scan in grayscale or color to capture it, which would take a lot more storage space. So they are probably doing bitonal scans. Yellow would work too but it’s much harder for an eye to see. This fluorescent orange is readable enough to a human eye but apparently tricky for a machine.

Of course the return address is optional, so the best privacy is to simply not supply a return address. But if return service is wanted, supplying a return address is inherently needed.

Another thought: suppose an address is dark blue text on a light blue background, or white text on a medium blue background. The scanning software would have to be quite advanced to choose a threshold that treats the text differently than the background, no? If the return address is fluorescent orange and the destination address has a background color, envelopes could perhaps be printed in a way that stifles the mass surveillance.

(†) I cannot concretely assert that it is fluorescent; just describing what it looks like.

I have filed several GDPR art.77 complaints. Every,single,complaint → mothballed.

So I must ask: is it just high-profile or high visibility cases submitted by reputable orgs like NoYB that get enforced? Has anyone here personally filed an art.77 complaint as a no-name individual on behalf of yourself and gotten results from the DPA?

For me, the GDPR is essentially non-existent. I believe the EU masses believe they can live fast-and-loose with their digital footprints because they are under an illusion that the GDPR will protect them. I used think the US must be annoyed with the GDPR because it would seem to put tech giants under control. But in fact it apparently creates a false sense of security in Europe that exposes off-guard Europeans to surveillance capitalism to an unexpected extent.

I encourage EU folks to exercise their imaginary GDPR rights (e.g. make access requests and erasure requests). And when a data controller ignores the request submit an art.77 complaint to experience the dysfunction 1st-hand. Some data controllers will simply comply. This is because they are also unaware of the lack of enforcement.

cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/31761131

Cliff’s notes: Team GOP prevailed, the people lost on netneutrality. The only thing you can do now is cancel your broadband.. something very few people have the will power to do.

I suppose the reason they did not take it to the supreme court is Trump managed to stack that court in favor of the right-wing nutjobs. So if the case goes there, it will do the GOP’s bidding to favor big business over the people and enter an oppressive decision that is even harder to correct in the future.

(note this story was originally on Ars Technica but that site is enshitified so I found a less enshitified source to link -- something more fedi posters should do)

Cliff’s notes: Team GOP prevailed, the people lost on netneutrality. The only thing you can do now is cancel your broadband.. something very few people have the will power to do.

I suppose the reason they did not take it to the supreme court is Trump managed to stack that court in favor of the right-wing nutjobs. So if the case goes there, it will do the GOP’s bidding to favor big business over the people and enter an oppressive decision that is even harder to correct in the future.

(note this story was originally on Ars Technica but that site is enshitified so I found a less enshitified source to link -- something more fedi posters should do)

This is a copy of page 82 of the annual report by Ireland’s data protection commission:

Use of CCTV in restrooms

Throughout 2023, the DPC received numerous queries and complaints from individuals about organisations’ use of CCTV in restrooms or areas where a high expectation of privacy exists (see Annual Report 2023).

The DPC engaged with these organisations on a one-to-one basis and also updated its guidance on the use of CCTV by data controllers to include a specific section on “The use of CCTV in areas of an increased expectation of privacy”. QR 2 This was aimed at clarifying the position of the use of CCTV in areas where individuals have a heightened expectation of privacy. In addition, the DPC contacted the relevant industry bodies to inform them of the update with the DPC’s guidelines.

As a consequence of this guidance, in 2024 the DPC noted a considerable reduction in concerns raised by the public about CCTV in restrooms or areas where a high expectation of privacy exists.

The DPC intended to engage with small and medium sized enterprises throughout 2025 on similar issues to deliver clear and practical guidelines to assist these organisations in meeting their compliance responsibilities in a proportionate and balanced manner.

Seems bizarre that it would even end up in the DPA’s hands; as if people don’t have enough sense to instantly see the GDPR problem and correct it as fast as possible.

I suppose it could be due to only ~⅓ of complaints getting action from the Irish DPA.

I need to start a project in the cloud for collaboration. Normally gitea would be the answer. But there are some binary blobs, like images (logos, icons, etc).

I think most ppl just say “fuck it, I will put these binary objects that do not need version control under version control, just to get them in the same place”.

Is there a smarter approach?

cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/7561562

There is hardly any discussion on this trending variety of web enshitification where a website needs to give physical locations to people. Many web devs are starting to spotlight their profound incompetence in accomplishing this very simple task. They throw up an interactive map which requires the full utilization of fancy GUI browser frills with 3rd party js enabled, which excludes all but those who “chase the shiny”. A 1990s high schooler could handle this better in plain HTML.

Doesn’t this screw over blind people? How does a screen reader handle a map?

My hardened low-bandwidth browser can’t handle this absurd degree of putting fancy above access equality. When this shit happens on a vendor’s website and I’m trying to locate them to give them business, the answer is easy: they can fuck off and lose my business. But it’s sad when a government does it and the information has medical relevance.