Exactly how this version of "AI" should be used. Not treated as an independent intelligence, which it's not, but treated as a tool for those with independent intelligence.

There's not a need to have vaultwarden up all of the time unless you use new devices often or create and modify entries really often. The data is cached on the device and kept encrypted by the app locally. So a little downtime shouldn't be a big issue in the large majority of cases.

Not a new thing, and I can definitely see good uses for this information. What they should have done is made it so that the one being tracked gets a log and real time notification any time someone is tracking them. This would alleviate some of the toxic spying behavior simply by making it transparent rather than covert.

A desktop environment is a waste of resources on a system where you'll only use it to install and occasionally upgrade a few server applications. The RAM, CPU power, and electricity used to run the desktop environment could be instead powering another couple of small applications.

Selfhosting is already inefficient with computing resources just like everyone building their own separate infrastructure in a city is less efficient. Problem is infrastructure is shared ownership whereas most online services are not owned by the users so selfhosting makes sense, but requires extra efficiencies.

Not really. I can't think of a major social media software company that isn't exploitative. If that's where their specialty lies, then they either learn new skills which takes time, requires partially resetting your career, and money only to have that company then absorbed by an exploitative big company in a decade and do it all again, or just keep your job that started as a decent company and got corrupted already.

See the context mentioned by OP. It was a reply to a post about Recall on Windows.

Unfortunately, not everyone has a choice in who they work for in end-stage-capitalism. Work is about survival, not ideology. The majority of Americans are not far-right capitalists, but the vast majority of CEOs are, and it's not really possible to survive long enough to start a small business in most of the US without investment from a far-right capitalist or inheritance (usually also from a far-right capitalist family member).

Not surprising timing since Trump is disrupting the global economy meaning already vulnerable megacorps are putting less money into security, and Trump deprioritized cyber crime law enforcement, so the US government won't be running interference.

I have a separate boot partition so the rest can be encrypted with luks. That's all that's needed in a large majority of scenarios. Most other setups end up needing to resize something at some point which in many cases is a total pain.

On my primary PC I do have a second hard drive for documents and other long term storage files that I want to access more often than on the NAS. This way it's nearly impossible to lose those files of I reinstall something and it can act as a temporary backup storage for settings files when I do reinstall stuff rather than having a partition that wastes space or runs out of space.

I mean didn't Trump deprioritize cyber crime enforcement against certain countries he's indebted to that are notorious for scamming Americans. So no surprise that they'd go over the top since they are free to do basically anything.

It's not that you can't at all, it's just that you'd either need to give up a lot of the functionality of a lot of sites or at least reduce the usability of many sites and your browser or configure whitelist and such for every site manually and deal with breaking changes when websites update.

Everyone having to prove they're an adult just means the end of privacy on social media. Tracking everything you do online becomes extremely easy when your real ID is attached to your advertising IDs. And breaches become leaks of more significant data used in age verification.

https://searx.space/

Problem is that if a site gets too popular, then the search engines like google tend to start rate limiting. Before in started self hosting I jumped around every couple of months to a new server.

What's wrong with being the only one on it?

It's not profitable.

I'd say none will be private in the long term. Acquisitions ultimately break that eventually. It's hard to run a successful service and not get acquired, eventually. So, I have a self-hosted searxng instance. DDG has already started moving away from privacy and Startpage has some signs it might be moving that way in the near future. I'll let others comment on the current state of things at each, but if you give your search to any profit driven company it has the potential to be sold. But IMHO Qwant is currently the best option outside of metasearch engines with small nonprofit ownership, whoch can be unreliable, or self hosting.

I think this is a great idea and a great goal. It will take time and the process will not be easy as there's always subjectivity. But I think if you make sure to include everyone, but also don't waffle too much once the subjective stuff is given proper attention, it can be great.

Yes it's a violation of the law, but much like any other laws, there are defenses to these built into the laws. For example, for murder, if you kill someone, you commit murder (or homicide or whatever word is used), but there is a built in defense that you are allowed to do this in cases of self-defense. So still guilty of the crime itself, but the exceptions make it not a criminally punishable act.

Similarly, in copyright there is the concept of fair use. Again, any copy you make of a copyrighted work violates the copyright act, however there are scenarios where the copying becomes not a punishable offense. In copyright, these are usually things that there is a benefit to society that outweighs the detriment to the copyright owner such as transformative art which creates new art, or backup for purposes of archiving. So likely the copy itself is protected here. The potential issue comes in the fact that they then share that copy. This is where the legality becomes murky as copyright law in the US has never been updated fully to deal with digital copies which take miniscule cost to produce and are nondestructive of the original.

But let's assume that the law supports the music industry. Then we move to harm. How much harm has been done to the owner. Since this is a corporation we're only talking profit, not emotional or other types of harm that might be involved. In this case they are claiming that for each work shared over the internet, they have been denied $150,000 in potential profit from selling those works.

This is where the real issue comes in in that courts rarely dispute these ridiculous numbers. IMHO the fact that they are pitting these kinds of numbers in a court document sounds like fraud to me. For much of this work they have no actual copies of the works because they were destroyed or deteriorated. So how could they sell them and make profit? For what they do have, is there even much of a market for any of that content and would that market generate $150,000 for a single random song written many decades before most of us were born. Sure the award will likely be less than that, but I bet the average song on this list might generate less than $1 in the time from when they posted them to when their copyright finally expires. So charge them a few hundred dollars and be done with it.

The issue is that the works are otherwise not available for sale and any licensing is done across all works owned by these companies and this is how they get the $150,000 per work number. They don't sell licenses just for old works because the system was never designed to support copyright lasting as long as it does now.

I mean, the stuff in the Great 78 Project is stuff that is so old that copyright was not designed to support the lengths of time they currently do so archiving wasn't as big of a concern because the media it was created on would be less likely to deteriorate in that time. When the owner is a corporation who for the most part not only doesn't sell but refuses to archive works that are breaking down due to the physical age of the media and would rather the works disappear than allow for archiving, how are they harmed to the tune of $150,000 per recording? And who is this benefiting to let recordings, stories, and other art forms literally turn to dust with no monetary profit going to anyone in most cases if it's not archived.

How do you connect? Is there a domain? Is that domain used for email or any other way that it might circulate?

Also, depends on if the IP address was used for something in the past that was useful to target or not. And finally do you use that IP address outbound a lot, like do you connect to a lot of other services, websites, etc. And finally, does your ISP have geolocation blocks or other filters in place?

It's rare for a process to just scan through all possible IP addresses to find a vulnerable service, there are billions and that would take a very long time. Usually, they use lists of known targets or scan through the addresses owned by certain ISPs. So if you don't have a domain, or that domain is not used for anything else, and you IP address has never gotten on a list in the past, then it's less likely you'll get targeted. But that's no reason to lower your guard. Security through obscurity is only a contributory strategy. Once that obscurity is broken, you're a prime target if anything is vulnerable. New targets get the most attention as they often fix their vulnerabilities once discovered so it has to be used fast, but tend to be the easiest to get lots of goodies out of. Like the person who lives on a side street during trick-or-treat that gives out handfuls of candy to get rid of it fast enough. Once the kids find out, they swarm. Lol