I think if LetsEncrypt went away, so would ZeroSSL’s free offer.
However, I do think not having limitations on the API is good; automation is good practice and I guess this is a concession to customers /users who have no automation in place (though this is a sad state by now). LE doesn’t offer anything comparable AFAIK.
Never used them, but they state at https://zerossl.com/features/acme/ that their free acme certs include wildcards.
Maybe ZeroSSL
Sheesh gramps get with the times
Snaps both predate flatpak and do things that Flatpaks are not designed to do.
By less than a year judging by the article… and for individual applications, there was AppImage.
Snaps can do things flatpaks can’t do. Which is true but also kind of irrelevant if we’re talking about a means to distribute applications in a cross-distribution manner as opposed to a base system A/B partition solution.
Or am I misunderstanding?
Everyone should use what suits them best. My negative opinion on snaps doesn’t mean Ubuntu shouldn’t ship it or that users shouldn’t use it. It’s Canonical’s distribution, they can put into it whatever they want for all I care, and if users are happy with it, good for them. But I can still criticize it for perceived issues. (Edit: kind of a straw man since nobody said I couldn’t, I just wanted to stress that I’m not authoritative on the matter)
But I understand that Ubuntu isn’t for you if you want to avoid snaps.
I used Ubuntu in the past, from I think 2004 or maybe 2005 to 2008, but switched away because of other issues that I don’t remember anymore, but I do remember upgrades between major versions were always pain with an Nvidia card (this was before AMD or in the beginning even ATI cards were well-usable under Linux) and I honestly just prefer rolling release nowadays. But snaps are just not at all compelling anyways.
I don’t like snaps because it’s just another Canonical NIH thing. Everyone else agreed on flatpak which seems to have a good design with portals and all and being fully open.
On the other hand, you have snaps, which is being controlled by Canonical as the server component is l non-public. The packages sometimes work worse than normal debs and the flatpak version (steam being a notable example IIRC).
There is 0 motivation for me as a user to look into that. They have solved the problem in one of the worst ways possible. Even Mint, which is Ubuntu’s biggest downstream, has opted against including it by default.
In addition to all of that, Canonical also installs applications as snap when using the apt\£* command line tools.
So you have a system that is
Ubuntu’s mission was always to build bridges between the user and tech and businesses that the gnu side of Linux wouldn’t.
Which bridge did they build with snaps?
It’s a good just works distro that has spawned a ton of just works distros
Which in turn have removed snaps by default and replaced the affected packages with native ones because it often didn’t “just work”
I’d guess this is less about MINIX vs. Linux and more about ultimately having 0 control over or insight into it.
Remember when those were called image macros?
The joke being that he didn’t actually say it, same as Microsoft never stating 10 being the last version of Windows ever
What would be the utility for someone, who cares about privacy and currently uses Signal and email for communication?
Your organization can’t host a federated Signal server, and email isn’t private.
Is Matrix anything good already, or is it something with potential that’s still fully in development?
My previous organization has used it for over 4 years without issues, however mostly limited to text.
How tech savvy does one need to be to use Matrix?
Simply using? Not very much, basically like Lemmy.
Blue screens were much more common back in the day, I guess nowadays they’re equally stable. Windows current issues are the deliberate choices Microsoft makes
Believe it or not, even the thugs beating down protests enjoy western luxuries… Or not having 20% inflation.
Plus, enforcing your government’s policies becomes a whole lot less attractive if all your neighbors dislike your employer. It all trickles down eventually.
And I don’t know if you noticed or not, unfortunately, the sanctions aren’t working that well… Maybe the answer is more sanctions? idk
I’m in favor of more of them, but I don’t think the current ones aren’t working. It was clear from the beginning that they’d be escalating so that Russia has a way out. They’re not using it so sanctions get worse.
Sure… Their anger will be directed at Putin, not at who actually imposed those sanctions.
I am worried that these sanctions will make them band together and support Putin even more.
And then what? They’ll go to war even harder? And if Putin is such a good leader, why doesn’t he just have Russia produce alternatives to the goods and services under sanctions?
The old status quo without sanctions got the world into the current situation. Why would keeping it the same fix it?
One could also make the opposite case for your logic: I am worried that without sanctions, people will see Putin as a strong leader, and as such hand together and support him even more.
We are entering the era of cyber-warfare, nation-state counter hacking, software and hardware sabotage, underground black and grey markets for both hardware and software.
We have entered that territory at least 10 years ago.
The rest I agree with. But I also think this is in fact the right move: you need to create pressure that hurts both the leadership and the people.
Qualcomm paying as much as other licensees should be preferable to Qualcomm than bankruptcy.
Not saying this is wrong, but where do you get it from? The article just states that ARM considers Qualcomm’s acquisition of Nuvia a breach of license. Both companies held ARM licenses before. What’s the issue with such a purchase?
From memory: Convert text to path, then have it redrawn.
What that monopoly got us: The C programming language, UNIX, UTF-8, among others
What the current tech monopolies yielded: yachts for the upper management
The problem I have with this is that there’s no definition of what “owning” means. Never have individuals bought a game and then owned all rights associated with it. It was always a license that included personal use and nothing much else.
However, due to how media distribution worked, this license was generally valid forever and could be transferred to another party, and these two factors - especially the first one - make a good point: why would I enter such a license if the other side can factually nullify it at any point, while I lose that option after a certain time?
Apart from that, media piracy was never stealing in the first place. It’s about unlicensed usage and distribution of media. And rightholders can’t be surprised if people don’t license it if the construct is so stacked to their disadvantage.