• 0 Posts
  • 12 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 16th, 2023

help-circle
  • I think there needs to be more government involvement and protection in how data is collected, shared, and consumed; however, I also think people don’t realize that their perception of ‘privacy’ has always had the major benefit of being from the perspective of an individual that largely is unprofitable.

    Many celebrities would very likely tell the public that ‘privacy’ is largely a myth and the reason their perspective is that way is because their lives, activities, and actions are viewed as profitable to someone. A lucrative paycheck from acquiring that salacious photo in a vulnerable position, etc is a big motivator, and if the celebrity gets mad at the paparazzi, there’s even more news about how the celebrity lost their shit for all the world to see; however, if the celebrity embraces the media and tries to work with them to conserve what little ‘privacy’ they have, there is negative news about how the celebrity is fake or too controlling about their image. At the end of the day, these celebrities simply want to have dinner out with family or friends and they can’t.

    The general public isn’t used to the idea that someone cares enough about every nuanced detail of their decisions that it would matter… but it does. Sadly, a celebrity must spend thousands of dollars to secure their privacy, and even then it isn’t a guarantee… what hope do we have? In today’s society we use debit or credit cards, but all of the transactions are data mined by the banks and privacy is non-existent; however, with cash you have some built-in ‘privacy’ because at its core it is not easily profitable to track.

    And that is the point; Data collection is slowly bridging the gap between a celebrity’s reality and normal everyday human perception of ‘privacy’.


  • Children are still humans, and you should respect them as such

    Absolutely; however, children aren’t adults and until the child is an adult, the parent is the legal custodian for that child. Part of that duty is to protect the child from negative outside influences and / or themselves if need be. When it comes to my child, while they are not an adult, nothing is off the table of consideration in order to protect them.

    The last thing kids need is their father to snoop around in their web traffic and erode any kind of privacy

    Respectfully, we disagree. The last thing a child needs is to be scooped up in a web of lies by an online predator and kidnapped, raped, humiliated, or worse… killed.

    You seem to think I would refuse my child any privacy, but that isn’t the case. I will protect my children the best way I can from any harm, and that starts by being aware and setting limits for them that not only protects them but also protects their privacy. If those limits get violated, then I have cause for concern and would need to re-evaluate those limits… and in that situation, yes, I would snoop on their web traffic.

    I’m a firm believer that the middle road is usually the best stance to take in most situations until you’re given valid reason to act. I doubt anything I have said thus far has swayed your opinion; therefore, I think we will just have to respectfully agree to disagree. :)


  • Disclaimer: I know the article is for the UK, but I’m in the US, so my reply will be US focused

    There’s always more than one side to every issue…

    • Social media is the devil and Parents before 2000 didn’t have to worry much, or did they, about their kids being on the internet 24/7

    First, you needed a computer, a pretty expensive, bulky item, and then you needed the internet, mostly tied to a fixed landline that interrupted the main form of personal communication up until around the mid 90s. Even in the late 90s, internet options that wouldn’t interrupt the landline service usually had big draw-backs (usually price or shared bandwidth, etc). The point is that while the internet and social media existed back then (newsgroups, BBS, IRC, etc), their availability was limited by external factors.

    Before the age of 15, my parents wouldn’t allow us to have our own computers, we were limited to a few hours per day of screen time, and less than 1 hour per day on the internet. In addition, the 1 hour of internet had to be on our father’s computer which was in public view. These rules didn’t stop us from doing bad stuff, but it definitely limited things.

    After the age of 16, we were able to have our own computers, but internet access was still limited to 1 hour per day. Fortunately for me, I had an older brother that was 18 and leaving home, so before he left, I asked him to create an account with the ISP and I’d pay the bill). At this point, I was 16 with unlimited internet, the only problem was it still interrupted the main house land line, but that changed a year or so later with DSL.

    Even when the technology and availability was semi-difficult to work around, I still got into a ton of online arguments with random, unknown people about stupid stuff, formed online friendships and “relationships”, sexted, even got into arguments with other jealous dudes trying to steal my online girl, etc.

    All of this is to say though that while my social media experience during my teen years wasn’t nearly as bad as what kids are subjected to today, my parents were right that they had reasons to be worried, and I’m sure the rules they did enforce along with the hoops I had to jump through with the tech kept me from making some pretty unfathomable mistakes which is kind of ridiculous considering everything else I did that I’m not admitting to ;-)

    Today parents shove a smart phone into their child’s hand to stop them from crying or to keep them busy, but many don’t realize the power of influence the phone, social media, or they have over their child.

    I really hate to say this, but a parent should not be a friend. My parents didn’t do everything they could, but I’d give them a solid B rating (85 grade) on trying to minimize any bad influence from the internet given the tech that was reasonably priced and at their fingertips. However, today, parents just straight don’t have any excuse.

    There are $50 routers that have pretty extensive, standard parental tech on-board. They can limit the access to the internet per day and for certain hours, log all websites visited, deny access to certain websites, etc. There are more tech savvy options too, logging all traffic, Remote viewing, etc.

    Android and Apple phones can block all incoming / outgoing, calls / SMS except for those on an approved contact list, You can deny access to certain apps, even force the phone / app to go into a limp mode when a certain “on-screen-time” is met, etc

    Parents today have so much available to them to prevent their children from being “mind-controlled” by social media; however, the most important aspect is awareness or resolve to do something about it. A parents’ job, until the child becomes mature enough or legally an adult, is to always present, support, and or sometimes enforce the overall best, healthiest decision.

    While I won’t deny that some stuff on social media has gotten out of control, I mostly think parents today are to blame and the government needs to stay out of it except if they want to enforce a higher minimum age limit for social media or try and penalize the companies for obvious negligence on not properly making the efforts to keep younger children off the platforms.



  • HDMI didn’t succeed over display port; they’re two different formats meant for two different audiences.

    • HDMI is meant for consumer electronics like TVs / set-top boxes because it focuses on delivering a little bit of everything (audio, video, network, DRM, etc) in a single cable for the best, easiest (minus the DRM) singular TV / device experience.

    • Display port is meant for computers because it focuses on delivering the best responsive multi-monitor experience.

    In other words, if you are working or gaming on a computer, you should be using Display port; however, if you are using anything else, you should be using HDMI.



  • Ease of setup including nvidia drivers

    Any mainstream distribution would relatively satisfy this requirement (Arch, Fedora, Ubuntu); however, Fedora might be slightly less amenable since it would require third-party repository RPM Fusion. Don’t get me wrong, it is a real simple process to add, but it can also cause some headaches.

    Ease of update via command line (I’m not going to download nvidia drivers from their website to update proprietary drivers)

    The best way to install the Nvidia driver is through your distribution’s system package manager. In fact, it is never recommended to download from Nvidia’s website. If you do, you’re flat out doing it the wrong way…

    Graphics performance

    The graphics performance will mostly be the same since you are using Nvidia and relying less on open source components; however, you still would want a distribution that is updated relatively frequently; therefore, I would suggest Fedora or Ubuntu.

    Keep in mind that SteamOS is based on Manjaro (Arch), so I’m sure it would be fine as well, but Arch based distributions are more “rolling” and can experience their own issues.

    Fedora has its own quirks as well; therefore, I would recommend hanging back one full release. For example, right now, Fedora 39 is the latest release and that means you should likely install and stay on Fedora 38 until Fedora 40 releases.

    Prefer Ubuntu based

    Your best option would be to use Ubuntu / Ubuntu LTS


  • As a PSA, I see nothing wrong with your statement; however, if you’re trying to say my advice is wrong or flawed because Fedora is now running a kernel that has a problem… well, such is life, but my point still stands because now the entire fedora AMD community will likely rally behind the issue which wouldn’t have happened before.



  • I’ve done some work with AMD and Nvidia that I shan’t disclose more of, but to be totally honest / transparent, my experiences with either of their internal workings was kind of eye opening in a not so good kind of way; however, that isn’t to say I distrust them or their work, because I could say that about several prominent Tech companies that most individuals would ordinarily think the best of. At the end of the day, I don’t think my experiences are 100% representational of an entire company, but after being in the industry for 23+ years… you kind of learn to stay away from that BCBS: if you know you know.


  • You’re riding the edge too close. Fedora 39 hasn’t even moved to a 6.7 kernel yet – They’re on 6.6.14-200.

    If you’re running a newer kernel than the latest released Fedora, you better be a Linux guru or you’re gonna pay with pain, and thats coming from someone with 23+ years experience running / working on Linux and I have an AMD RX 7900 XTX