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.

Get a dumb video projector.

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.

Seems Snikket container behind proxy isn’t a properly documented setup despite https://snikket.org/service/help/advanced/reverse_proxy/ so I didn’t manage either.

Well… I started a GitPod instance few minutes ago and… it’s still not up so that’s not a great sign, cf https://github.com/RocketChat/Rocket.Chat/issues/33537 .

Trying Snikket on my server now. Curious to read about suggestions from others.

Depends entirely what they are doing with it. If they are using services with DRM, e.g. Netflix or Disney+ I bet you will be out of luck because that pulls out an entire ecosystem, driven by Google, which is based on selling ads.

“not realistic to propose rpi and more complex systems”

If they have to install it, probably not. If they have to plug it on the HDMI port, power and optionally Ethernet honestly things like LibreElec or Kodi are pretty well done. Heck even a very young kid (talking not even 5y/o) can manage that (I’ve seen it, repetitively) or even start VLC to connect to DLNA server as long as it’s properly setup.

This is the market place, brah.

…

Free market capitalism

then talk about subsidies or non capitalist country controlling the currency, markets, VCs, etc.

What does that even mean?

If you were implying that I said being funded by Alphabet/Google was a good thing then let me be explicit, I did NOT say that nor believe it to be the case. Now, once again, cf my actual comment about pragmatic better alternative we can rely on and support today. If you meant to suggest better and are supporting that, please do share.

I thought saying

contribute however they can up to their own capabilities

was actually very clear but seems I wasn’t clear enough so that means… literally doing ANYTHING except only criticizing. That can mean being an open-source developer, yes, but that can also means translation, giving literally 1 cent, etc. It means doing anything at all that would not ONLY be saying “this is good, but it’s not good enough” without doing actually a single thing to change, especially while actually using another free of charge browser that is funded by advertisement. Honestly if that’s not clear enough I’m not sure what would be … but please, do ask again I will genuinely try to be clearer.

I hope everybody criticizing the move either do not use products from Mozilla or, if they do, contribute however they can up to their own capabilities. If you don’t, if you ONLY criticize, yet use Firefox (or a derivative, e.g. LibreWolf) or arguably worst use something fueled by ads (e.g. Chromium based browsers) then you are unfortunately contributing precisely to the model you are rejecting.

I’m using https://github.com/user234683/youtube-local and it’s working without issue.

What’s driving me nuts is that people will focus on the glasses.

Yes, the glasses ARE a problem because Meta, despite being warned by experts like AccessNow to SHOW when a camera is recording, you know with a bright red LED as it’s been the case with others devices before, kept it “stealthy” because it’s… cool I guess?

Anyway, the glasses themselves are but the tip of the iceberg. They are the end of the surveillance apparatus that people WILLINGLY decide to contribute to. What do I mean? Well that people who are “shocked” by this kind of demonstrations (because that’s what it is, not actual revelations) will be whining about it on Thread or X after sending a WhatsApp message to their friends and sending GMail to someone else on their Google, I mean Android, phone and testing the latest version of ChatGPT. Maybe the worst part in all this? They paid to get a Google Nest inside their home and an Amazon Ring video doorbell outside. They ARE part of the surveillance.

Those people are FUELING surveillance capitalism by pouring their private data to large corporations earning money on their usage.

Come on… be shocked yes, be horrified yes, but don’t pretend that you are not part of the problem. You ARE wearing those “glasses” in other form daily, you are paying for it with money and usage. Stop and buy actual products, software and hardware, from companies who do not make money with ads, directly or indirectly. Make sure the products you use do NOT rely on “the cloud” and siphon all your data elsewhere, for profit. Change today.

No doubt, the kernel itself is also quite complex… but my comment here is on the user experience perspective, namely, for me at least “it just works”. So I’m not trying to imply it will work for anybody flawlessly nor that it’s due to the simplicity of the stack, solely that it works, for me.

I’d argue… Alpine?

Why? Well, because it’s small. So Alpine isn’t the programming distribution itself but rather the distribution for the container your run whatever you build inside of just because it’s very VERY small (like… 5MB?!).

Obviously that makes sense only in some cases. For example for a frontend Web developer or a game developer (or a WebXR dev like me) it might not help much but otherwise,… maybe?

Anyway if you are into this kind of things check also Gitpod, it’s about wrapping your dev environment inside a container then having it anytime, anywhere, including for other developers and facilitate their onboarding.

HP Laser 107w, driverless, over LAN.

I just Ctrl+P from any software and it prints.

It also prints programmatically (for e.g. folk.computer ) thanks to IPP.

I didn’t have to “think about printing” since I have that setup so I don’t know where you get that sentiment.

Indeed, AKA the OpenAI playbook.