utopiah

~/Prototypes on pretty much all machines I own, from desktop, laptop, server, tablets, ebook readers, RPis, XR headset, video projector, etc.

Indeed. That being said I have a (sigh) Android video projector (Nebula Mars II Pro, by Anker) and even though it does comes with its bloatware (namely "trying" to force installation, without actually doing it, of e.g. YouTube or NetFlix apps) attempts one can ignore that, install F-Droid, install VLC and Launch on Boot from there then boot straight to VLC without have to interact with the stock launcher. Also remote adb works by default so one can tinker quite a bit without even having to active a kind of developer mode.

Too late, back to Debian proper.

Get a dumb video projector.

I used Kodi with LibreElec for years in a similar setup. It was nice... but in practice I didn't really use the "cool" functionalities (like indexing, image preview, Web remote control, etc) so instead I checked how Kodi works and noticed DLNA. I saw that my favorite video player, namely VLC, supports DLNA. I then looking for DLNA server on Linux, found few and stuck to the simplest I found, namely minidlna. It's quite basic, at the least the way I use it, but for my usage it's enough :

• install VLC on clients, including Android video projector, phones, XR HMDs, etc
• install minidlna on server (RPi5)
• configure minidlna to serve the right directory with subdirectories ( /var/lib/minidlna by default )
• configure few extra software that get videos to push them (via scp script and ssh-key) to rpi5:/var/lib/minidlna/

voila... very reliable setup (been using for more than a year on a daily basis.

Meanwhile, I deleted my Windows partition (even though I paid for it, damn OEM tricks) and feel better for it https://lemmy.world/comment/12818969

So if you are genuinely worried about this, don't.

First because, as numerous persons already clarified, researchers here are breaking deprecated cryptography.

It's a bit like taking toothpicks and opening a lock while the locks used in your modern car is very different. Yes, it IS actually interesting but the same technique does not apply in practice, only in principle.

Second because IF in principle there IS a path to radically grow in power, there are already modern cryptography techniques which are resistant to scaling the power of quantum computers. Consequently it is NOT just about small the key is, but also HOW that key is made, what are the mathematical foundations on which a key is made, and can be broken.

Anyway for a few years now there has been research, roughly matching the interest in quantum computers, to what is called post-quantum encryption, or quantum resistant encryption. Basically the goal of the research is to find new ways to make keys that are very cheap to generate and verify, literally with something as cheap and non powerful as the chip in your credit card, BUT practically impossible to "crack" for a computer, even a quantum computer, even a powerful one. The result of that on-going research are schemes like Kyber, FALCON, SPHINCS+, etc which answer such requirements. Organizations like NIST in the US verify that the schemes are actually without flaws and the do recommendations.

So... all this to say that a powerful quantum computer is still not something that breaks encryption overall.

If you are worried TODAY, you can even "play" with implementations like https://github.com/open-quantum-safe/oqs-demos and setup a server, e.g Apache, and a client, e.g Chromium, so that they can communicate using such schemes.

Now practically speaking if you are not technically inclined or just want to bother, you can "just" use modern software, e.g Signal, which last year https://signal.org/blog/pqxdh/ announced that they are doing just that on your behalf.

You can finally expect all actors, e.g hosts like Lemmy, browsers like Firefox, that you use daily to access content to gradually both integrate post-quantum encryption but also gradually deprecate older, and thus risky, schemes. In fact if you try to connect today to old hardware via e.g ssh you might find yourself forced to accept older encryption. This very action is interesting because it does show that over the years encryption changes, old schemes get deprecated and replace.

TL;DR: cool, not worried though even with a properly powerful quantum computer because post-quantum encryption is being rolled out already.

What this show is a total lack of originality.

AI is not new. Open-source is not new. Putting two well known concepts together wasn't new either because... AI has historically been open. A lot of the cutting edge research is done in public laboratories, with public funding, and is published in journals (sadly often behind paywall but still).

So the name and the concept are both unoriginal.

A lot of the popularity gained from OpenAI by using a chatbot is not new either. Relying on always larger dataset and benefiting from Moore's law is not new either.

So I'm not standing on any side, neither this person nor the corporation.

I find that claiming to be "owning" common ideas is destructive for most.

To consider related to evaluation of said hardware, cf https://lemmy.ml/post/20849010/14003579

I mean it's very complex and very expensive for "just" a key but if you want something fully auditable maybe Precursor.dev is a good fit. It's more than a key but the point is that it's as open as it can be. Honestly I'd consider it more a learning adventure that an tool at this point but still, see https://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/2022/towards-a-more-open-secure-element-chip/ for the philosophy and https://github.com/betrusted-io/xous-core with Vault for the key aspect specifically.

Yep, already happily running on my PineTab2 thanks to DanctNix!

Just yesterday I pinned VLC on my KDE Plasma Task Manager. Why? Because this way I can directly open "Recent Files" from it. I discovered about this functionality just last week with Libre Office Draw. It's so efficient, it absolutely changed how I use my computer daily!

but... why do I bother with this long example? Because IMHO that's from KDE, not Debian. When a distro improve the UX, as I also wish, it can be mostly by selecting the best software in its packages to maintain (e.g. here KDE but yes could indeed be their own custom made package, even though it requires a lot more resource AND other distro could also use them back assuming it's FLOSS) but arguably the UX is mostly of the distribution itself is limited to the installation process.