Jaśność w Niemczech, nowa niepewność prawna we Włoszech, i gdzie Sony mógłby skarzać następny raz?

Świetnie! Ale otwarte prowadzenie Systemu Nazw Domen chyba pozostaje mozaikę w UE…

Przypadkowo utrudnić dostęp lub zagrozić prywatności też jest niedobrze. Warto znać swoje narzędzia na tyle dobrze, aby tego uniknąć.

Ale w tym przypadku już pomaga po prostu przełączyć węzeł wyjściowy Tora. Jest praktycznie niemożliwe, aby strona była dostępna przez każdy węzeł wyjściowy.

Lepiej oprogramować coś użytecznego, jak Tor przepisany dla UDP…

F-Droid powinien być domyślym sklepem z aplikacjami dla urządzeń końcowych w UE. Jeśli chcę użyć Google Play, zmusza mnie to zawarcia umowy z tą amerykańską firmą. Nie zauważyłem czegoś takiego z F-Droidem. Poza tym Google Play wydaje się ne podejmować skutecznych działań przeciwko skryptom śledzącym w aplikacjach.

The comparison with IRC is not very meaningful: moving from one server to another is much easier because IRC users don’t lose followers, bookmarks, posts, etc.

The point is that IRC is normally used in a way that leaves more to the client. ActivityPub services usually expect that users put much more trust in the instances. It might be worth thinking about that.

How would a “built-in protection against centralization” even work?

IMHO, you can only provide tools. You can’t prevent people from being stupid and not using them. That’s also why by now, e.g. the EU tries to solve such problems through regulation.

If you don’t plan to host free software, you might not care.

For free software, you might consider GNU’s criteria for ethical repositories, under which this would already make the hosting unacceptable due to a violation of C2 (see https://www.gnu.org/software/repo-criteria.en.html). Even if you don’t adhere to GNU’s definition, you might then ask yourself why your definition of free software allows for more discrimination and whether that is justified.

Considering the increasing importance of AcivityPub-driven interaction, an interesting choice might be Codeberg as its underlying codebase Forgejo has an initiative heading for federation (see https://lemmy.ml/comment/396978)

Exciting! Might also indicate that @Codeberg@social.anoxinon.de could be a good choice for those willing to switch their #git hosting due to platform lock-in concerns because it’s likely that it would benefit from that to-be-implemented #federation support.

Definitely. But I guess the proprietary players will only take part when they are either forced to do so by regulation, or when 80% of the market already federates. So the question is probably which of the open source platforms has the biggest promise for making it happen.

Btw, a similar effort for Gitlab: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/30672

Beispiel Docker: Abgesehen davon, dass es lustig ist, Ruby als “veraltet” abzutun, aber Docker statt Podman zu wollen: Mir persoenlich ist ein Projekt mit nur einer Bare-Metal-Anleitung lieber als ein Projekt mit nur einem Docker-Image aber ohne vernuenftige Anleitung zum selber aufsetzen. Auf Basis der Bare-Metal-Anleitung kommt man meist schon weit, wenn man Container aufsetzen will. Umgekehrt sieht es schwierig aus. Und warum man alles auf dem “offiziellen Docker-Hub” finden muss, ist mir schleierhaft. Nicht umsonst wird dieser mitunter kritisch gesehen.

Mein Fazit: Herangehensweisen an die IT werden nie gleich sein, und das ist auch gut so, da es meist mehrere Wege gibt, die funktionieren. Aber vielleicht ist es konstruktiver, wenn man dann einen Pull-Request erstellt, wenn einem etwas auffaellt, was man meint, besser hinzubekommen (z.B. um Container-Skripte und/oder Dokumentation dazu beizutragen), statt moeglichst laut darueber zu streiten, dass man es persoenlich ja anders gemacht haette.

Federation and task/responsibility distribution would be exciting to solve the storage dimension issue.

Couldn’t someone train a model on their university’s computing cluster, and share it? This would boost independent research on these things for sure.

Słuchąc czy publikując?

On a more positive note: Saxony was the only federal state in Germany which, during times of more strict pandemic-related rules, allowed tracking exposure using the government-funded open source software instead of some app used by the other federal states based on stolen code whose only unique selling point was being advertised by a famous rapper…

And at the same time, Saxon universities coerce students into proprietary solutions, hiding behind university autonomy when members of the parliament criticize this.

The headline is misleading, as the article merely covers the decision of the Data Protection Commissioner of Hesse (one of Germany’s 16 federal states). Many other federal states have a similar tendency by now, but in detail it can be very different, and in practise, the Data Protection Commissioners can be very patient when it comes to giving schools additional time to switch to other solutions.

Big tech companies route loads of data through their data centers that could either be processed on the end users’ devices, or that aren’t needed at all for the services that help the end users. A comparison between the climate impact of all the big tech data center processing that is done for the sole purpose of the big tech companies and other factors relevant to climate would be both interesting and meaningful.

Edit: Funny to see downvoting without making a point. Regarding the latter mentioned source of serviceless resource wasting of big tech, see https://www.inkandswitch.com/slow-software/ (under “user-hostile work”). Regarding the former one, think about why your average smartphone keyboard implementation needs to phone home to the tech company’s data center, while there are implementations that work right on the device. Removing all this stuff could most likely greatly reduce the resource usage of today’s end user devices, and does not provide any useful service to the end users.