I think that it works, but for it to work you need to enable Google Play services. From what I understand, this is done in a sandboxed manner simulating a fake identity, so it is possible to do this while isolating Google from your phone to an extent. But I think that WhatsApp is in itself problematic and one of the direct offenders that I want to avoid, regardless of its reliance on Google Play services, and so I have not gone through this effort myself.
I made the switch when I got a new phone. So I kept both the old phone with android and the new phone with GrapheneOS. There was a transition period when I would bring both phones with me, just in case. Now my old phone is my “whatsapp” phone which I keep at home and turn on rarely. During the transition period I used my old phone number whenever I needed to provide my phone to use a service, but eventually I transitioned that to a VoIP. But, even then, many services will reject VoIP phone numbers, so I still make use of the old one.
I had to request a special scanner from my bank because the banking apps do not work with GrapheneOS. And I had to make sure that nothing important goes into my gmail anymore because google would request that I used my old phone 2FA in the most inconvenient moments, and also I don’t want to access google from my GrapheneOS phone.
I think that there are many annoyances that can and probably will happen if you try to jump right into GrapheneOS after having previously relied in the google/meta ecosystem. If you attempt to switch too quickly you might inadvertently lose access to your bank, and you might become suddenly unable to communicate with family and friends. My government’s online identification system requires that I use their app, which runs on google services, so I still have to use my old phone for that. And I have encountered situations in which the only reasonably convenient way to proceed is to download an app. For example, recently I registered for a gym that would then require me to use their google-store app so that I could identify myself when purchasing a physical card.
Sure.
If I make my own AI image generator and create a nice image with it, or use some AI engine that gives me full ownership of the output, I can choose to share it online with whatever license I want to share it with. I don’t see why the regular copyright rules for digital images and photographs would not hold… If someone shares their AI creation online and wants others to share with attribution, or not share at all, what is wrong with that?
I can take a ton of photos of objects with my phone, upload them to Flickr, and they are all copyrighted. That doesn’t mean that other’s can simply take similar photos if they wish to do so. The same with AI. One can decide whether to share with attribution, pay someone to let them use it, or to generate the image themselves using AI. It does not seem like a problem to me.
I wiped all my data from a supercomputer by trying to ‘cd’ into a folder but making a typo and then running rm -rvf * from my home directory.
At least they kept backups… The system administrators were probably amused about who gets access
My girlfriend kept complaining about losing her hearts on Duolingo and I was very confused as I never had any “hearts” during regular lessons. Eventually I found out that since I had created a classroom while exploring the site, I was given access to a teacher version of Duolingo - which is basically a free premium version 😅
Thank you - that makes sense!
I think I understand why this is done now. Most HTTP requests are hidden by the SSL encryption, and the keys to decrypt it are client-specific. So, if one wants to block ads at the network level without needing to get the SSL keys of every client that connects to the network, then this is the most specific amount of information that you can provide the PiHole with. The HTTP blocking needs to be set up in a client-specific manner, and that’s why they work well as browser extensions.
Thanks!
Adblocking plugins aren’t limited by this and can filter the actual content and HTTP requests made by the browser.
Why is this the case? What rules do Adblock plugins use that allow them to determine that something that is being served is an ad? I understand from what you are saying that Adblock will block on the basis of the HTTP requests instead of filtering at the DNS level - do ads come with specific HTTP headers that are not processed by the pi-hole DNS server and thus can’t be used for filtering? I don’t fully understand yet the details of how the two ad-blocking mechanisms operate, so their differences are not obvious to me.
Woah. That is a lot sooner than I had anticipated.
Yeah, I still see the line now. I am not sure if this was a one-off, maybe the edit occurred when I rebooted the instance for a moment and the edit fell through the cracks… Or there might be an actual issue federating edits.
I think you left this line behind by accident:
l = Lemmy(INSTANCE_URL)
EDIT: Sorry, I misunderstood this question ~~ I have a raspberry pi connected to a 1 TB SSD. This has the following cron job:
00 8 * * * /usr/bin/bash /home/user/backup/backup.sh
And the command in backup.sh is:
rsync --bwlimit=3200 -avHe ssh user-ip:/var/www/mander/volumes /home/user/backup/$(date | awk '{print $3"-" $2 "-"$6}')
In my case, my home network has a download speed of 1 Gbps, and the server has an upload speed of 50 Mbps, so I use -bwlimit=3200 to limit the download to 25.6 Mbps, and prevent over-loading my server’s bandwidth.
So every morning at 8 am the command is run and a full backup copy is created.
It seems that you have a different problem than me. In your case, rather than doing a full copy like me, you can do incremental backups. The incremental backup is done by using rsync to synchronize the same folder - so, instead of the variable folder name $(date | awk ‘{print $3"-" $2 “-”$6}’), you can simply call that instance_backup. You can copy the folder locally after syncronizing if you would like to keep a record of backups over a period of a few days.
On a second thought, I would also benefit from doing incremental backups and making the copies locally after synchronizing… ~~
Yeah, that is true. But:
A large site often collects a lot more sensitive data about a users such as phone numbers, ips, devices, activities, browser fingerprints, and even correlates accounts
Because of the value and quantity of the data, large sites will be attacked more often
However, a large enough data breach to be publicly exposed is not the only concern. I think that large sites pass their un-encrypted communications through filters to detect ‘illegal activities’, and in some countries ‘illegal’ can mean simply criticizing a powerful individual. Companies also use unencrypted communications to mine information that may be valuable to advertisers.
I would not be surprised to learn that an intelligence agency has the ability to search through the plaintext of all of the DMs from a big site. Sites may give this ability to intelligence agencies in oppressive governments to track the activities of politically inconvenient journalists, for example. Laws can also change, and at some point it could be made legal to search through messages to detect even minor crimes. This may be unlikely, but it is possible.
The pressures and stakes are different, but I wouldn’t trust either a big company or two guys. If it is important for you that your DMs remain private, then you should generate your own keys, encrypt messages yourself, and keep the keys safe.
Yeah, at least Lemmy tries to warn users not to use the DMs to send sensitive or private information, and suggests using a dedicated encrypted messenger instead:
The developers are very busy developing lemmy-specific features and encrypted DMs would be a lot of work to create something that is a bit redundant. But I am sure that if someone would want to make that, they would appreciate that help.
Not that I particularly trusted reddit, but at least it was 1 corporation with (hopefully) some solid security procedures in place, and potential penalties for data breaches. Whereas in Lemmy, it might just be 2 random guys.
Personally I wouldn’t trust 2,000 random guys any more than 2 random guys. I assume any of my unencrypted communications are public.
You can create a one-person instance and hold your identity there.
If you what you want is for every server to hold your identity, you have to trust all servers. I think that an evil admin would be able to impersonate any user from any instance if that were the case. How do you delete your account? Can an any admin delete your account everywhere? Which one is the real “you”?
I looked through the git, it was removed here: https://github.com/searx/searx/pull/2566
It appears that Yandex would respond to requests with a captcha and they were unable to fix it, so they removed it.
I am not sure as I did not test this one. Maybe you can go in person and get a worker to get you access to the kiosk through your account to print the card. It is one of those massive chains with gyms in every corner. I think that by now they rely on their digital infrastructure and many of their workers are not trained to handle uncommon situations. At least I get that from some of my experiences, but I could be wrong, maybe if I would have called them could have helped me with this. It was just easier to get the app into my old phone, print a card, delete the app.