Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Marrying a young girl (litterally: becoming master of the girl) is not illegal in the Old Testament, Islam, Vedic tradition, nor is it illegal in other eastern belief systems. It is illegal in the global religion that the United States and Britian has foisted upon the world and maintains through mandatory schooling, bombing, and economic sanctions. You believers in that religion do not allow any other religions or law systems to exist in the world. You use your power to create hegemony and are in a constant battle against other religions/law-systems which have little hope of holding their own against yours. You have the bomb. You have the military. You have everything. And you're on crusade.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Ah yes, your US religion's doctrine of informed consent. Which outlaws men marrying young girls no matter what. I hope some day your doctrines go back to the hell they came from and we have back the old ways where we could be ba'al of a girl. But yes, ofcourse ofcourse, the greatest sin in your US-feminist world religion, yes that must be stopped at ALL costs (males having a nice little sweet girl rather than a rough older tough female that knows her rights (ie knows she can call the para-military))
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
He stated clearly that just saying yes is not enough, since we can't be sure if this yes was only spoken because of fear. He meant real consent. In my opinion, we can never be sure whether it's real consent or not in case of children. We would need the possibility to ask the child 30 years in the future as an adult Did you really want this to happen? Did it any harm to you or your life?. I guess almost everyone would say no to the first and yes to the last question. Since we can't ask this question to someone in the future, this kind of sexuality should be illegal. I wish stallman had stressed this more clearly, but never the less, he didn't say something else.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
On 03/08/13 05:32, erikthorsen wrote: fucking little kids up the ass is fine so long as they say yes. How exactly does a discussion about security in Trisquel evolve into a discussion about anal sex? Andrew.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Lol, thanks for the heads up :P I might try it, do you know if they have a CD ISO, or do they work with DVD ISO only?
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Even RMS thinks child pornography is ok along with adultry, prositution and necrophilia: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Even RMS thinks child pornography is ok along with adultry, prositution and necrophilia: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman This is absolutely wrong. He thinks those things are ok as *long es no one gets coerced*; this statement excludes almost every child porn on the net, so he doesn't think they are ok. Don't spread false information.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Yeah right, 'cause there's totally an easy way to determine coersion and consent in the cases of child abuse, beastiality and necrophilia.. Please. That's just a downright disgusting thing to say.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
It's also a non-sequitur, because what RMS has said on the issue has nothing to do with what vPro has said. vPro advocates the right to marry children, RMS says he thinks child pornography can be consensual (he hasn't said whether or not he thinks it's possible to know whether or not it's consensual, despite what you say; he just said that the cases we are aware of are non-consensual and that it can't be used to judge cases that are consensual). Necrophilia, bestiality, prostitution, and adultery are completely unrelated.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Stallman lumps all those things together, thus he apparently thinks they're related.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Really? I didn't see him do that. I only saw him mention them together because they all have being illegal in common.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Looking at the actual source, he didn't even mention them together. Some politician did, and he was just responding to that politician: The nominee is quoted as saying that if the choice of a sexual partner were protected by the Constitution, prostitution, adultery, necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography, and even incest and pedophilia also would be. He is probably mistaken, legally--but that is unfortunate. All of these acts should be legal as long as no one is coerced. They are illegal only because of prejudice and narrowmindedness.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
...Yeah, so Stallman DOES lump them all together as equal and says that fucking little kids up the ass is fine so long as they say yes. So.. Thanks for proving my point..?
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Where does he equate saying yes with lack of coercion? How is this related to Trisquel? Why not discuss it in the offtopic forum at https://trisquel.info/en/forum/troll-hole? pgpA17RcilHlK.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Last I checked coersion simply means forcing someone to do something against their will. Thus the antonym would be consent.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
I didn't claim there is an easy way to determine coersion. I think when we're talking about child abuse, we almost never can determine the lack of coersion with certanty and so these things have definitely to be forbidden and get punished very hard; but talking about necrophilia - I think it's easy to determine if someone gets coerced. I find this topic really disgusting, but if two people agree on this (one of them when he was still alive) and no one gets forced or harmed - why should it be illegal? But yeah, this is a topic for the troll hole. I just wanted to correct the very incomplete quote of stallman.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
I also think about buying a yeeloong but after everything I've read, watching youtube videos / videos in general will be difficult. I quote this link: http://b.mtjm.eu/lemote-yeeloong.html Gentoo has patches making full-screen low quality YouTube videos playable (used WatchVideo for this), this probably could be ported to other distros. There are ongoing discussions on a new SiliconMotion video driver on the X.Org development list, maybe this driver will improve this situation (it has xrandr support). So I think you need some special patches for watching low-res-videos (!) which are only provided by gentoo. Don't know if it's possible to liberate gentoo; we could kick out the default kernel and use linux-libre instead, but I don't know if they have free-only repos.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
On 01/08/13 19:53, shiretoko wrote: Don't know if it's possible to liberate gentoo; we could kick out the default kernel and use linux-libre instead, but I don't know if they have free-only repos. I think Ututo is (or was?) based on Gentoo. But I don't know how English-friendly it is. I recall there being an English version, but the online documentation is Spanish. Andrew.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
So I think you need some special patches for watching low-res-videos (!) which are only provided by gentoo. The fact that only Gentoo provides them is not important. No one had applied them in gNS nor Parabola since e.g. they might depend on other X.Org versions, recent X.Org broke other acceleration for this graphics chip, upstream rejected these patches, and no Parabola contributor can fix/debug the MIPS assembly there. Don't know if it's possible to liberate gentoo; we could kick out the default kernel and use linux-libre instead, but I don't know if they have free-only repos. It's easy, making a Gentoo-based free distro is much harder. pgp53GYdGyElg.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
He does talk about marrying little girls a lot around here, doesn't he? There's probably some way to do it if you really wanted to, but why would you want to? I honestly can't think of any positives of marrying a kid, or, hell, even a kid that would want to be married at such a young age to a much older person. Honestly with all the work of trying to marry a little kid, it'd be a hell of a lot easier to marry someone who's actually your age. Anyway, off the subject of marrying little girls. A lot of stuff he says is fairly disturbing, but back to the subject at hand. Now, your point is to stick with older machines, and while that is a solution, that won't end the issue at hand. In, say 10 or so years, when that computer dies (motherboard issues, CPU issues, anything), you're going to need another computer. You can either try to track down an old computer to use it (and it might break again because it's just as old), or you can go for a new computer. So, honestly, a better solution would be to try to advocate hardware that respects both your privacy and your freedom, that way we can have computers that aren't ridiculously outdated and don't have any privacy issues. I know you're just being optimistic, but you gotta remember that all hardware breaks eventually.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Yes, it's really a broken system by this point. There are two alternatives to someone who wants to be a little bit safer: 1. Use something like Web of Trust. At least you have the power of community to back you up. 2. Test the site fingerprint manually in https://www.grc.com/fingerprints.htm Yes, you are still trusting a 3rd source, but at least you can check if there is anything suspicious So, yeah, I don't really think https is anywhere as safe as it once was... But it still provides some good protection (at least it's harder for a cracker or for your ISP to spy on you than if you were running simple http). I wonder, could one make a addon for abrowser that would check the certificate AND the fingerprint in GRC? That would double the protection.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
I don't think he is a pedophile (not what we would normally call one at least). Nor a troll. There seems to be something more to him than we see right now... But yeah, he is annoying and a little crazy, agree on that.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Ahaha, your avatar actually looks like she just read vPro comments, asking to marry her xD xD Anyway, the point is... I totally agree with you, open standards are the future! And I totally support them. But I was talking about a solution for now, as in I need a free clean computer to use NOW, I will change the world tomorrow. For now, the best way is to use old computers. For me it seems like we are right now bounded to a no win situation, because: 1. Modern computers HAVE backdoors in hardware. 2. Old computers have limited hardware resources (and might also have backdoors we don't know about). 3. Open source hardware are limited, and will usually run only gnewsense or some other not so stable distro. Also, involve a lot of do it yourself, which I am not good at (i am good with software, not hardware). SoOld computers are not a solution, but a compromise for now. But, once a open hardware project gets to the point that I can use them and they are within my price range... I get one ;)
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
What would really kick things off is a freedom friendly version of the Raspberry Pi. Those computers are really cool (and for all we know, the future of computing), but unfortunately there exists no freedom friendly device like that yet (that I know of). But just imagine, a ~$35 freedom friendly computer roughly the size of a credit card. I would buy that SO MUCH. (and my avatar was quite coincidential, but would be a reasonable reaction to reading vPro's comments. Why would you do that?!)
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Hehe. =P Well, yeah, but they probably wouldn't be all nice and sexy copylefted hardware. And there are other use cases too.. Then again, most people have fancy smartphones now so yeah. Well, they do link to an explaination on how to add the proper root certificates. As for the beagleboard, it's an ARM chip, and last I checked Trisquel only runs on x86(-64).
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Thanks for the link! From what I read, the beagle board can actually use a free bios and can work without proprietary drivers except for 3d acceleration. Let's face it, it's the same problem we have in most laptops (graphics cards usually won't have free drivers providing 3d acceleration) but with the plus that is free bios. I understand is not THE BEST solution, but it would still be better than many solutions we have right now.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Thanks Lembas. But, I know that I need to install that and I know how to dot it. It's just that in order to keep my system safe I don't go around installing anything just because some website says me trust me, install this and dive in! But yeah, If I need to actually take a look at parabola I will follow your advice. Thanks ;)
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Lol, yeah, I was just making a joke :P Already explained the certificate thing in above comment, and as for the last statement =( damn! I was really getting excited (thinking that if Ubuntu ran there, Trisquel would run too) and now, it all comes down to this. Hum well, I will hardly ever buy a new computer anyway, I might probably end up with a yeeloong one day. When computers like these can no longer do anything and we are forced to use newer things that were made to spy on us I will probably start fishing xD and counting rocks xD lool. I would have to say, I wouldn't actually mind having a low end computer... If I could get a machine that would not phone home, not have any closed source hardware or software, and allowed me to: browse web; edit documents; watch videos (youtube and videos on computer); use Tor Browser, Pidgin and OTR; I would probably be happy with that. You don't need a lot of machine power to do that. People used to do these things with a pentium 2, 256 mbs ram, 32 mbs graphics card. Well, I will keep looking and dreaming :P
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
You're welcome. It's just that in order to keep my system safe I don't go around installing anything just because some website says me trust me, install this and dive in! This is a very sound policy. I think things from the repo are inherently safer. The whole situation with the certificates is so very broken. We both browse the web with a browser that contains certificates from e.g. TÜRKTRUST (Turkish Military Force Solidarity Foundation), Comodo, CNNIC (China Internet Network Information Center), Intel, Baltimore, Japanese government, Microsoft, Staat der Nederlanden (Netherlands) and two dozen other CAs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certificate_authority#CA_compromise
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
The Trisquel developers are doing more than just cleaning the Ubuntu repositories, they take packages from others distros too, even directly from Debian. I've also seen some other packages that are not from other distro. What i want to tell is that they are working hard to make this distro and they deserve more merit.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Not phoning home? A friend in my book :P But honestly, if I wanted a music player and a calculator... I would buy a music player and a calculator :P As for gnewsense, well, their latest stable was 2009 and ever since they released 2 betas... Not what I call a solid development and support. So, that's a no (for now) in my book. I haven't checked Parabola yet, mainly because the website has a unknown certificate. Well, I saw it more expensive in other website, but anyway, try shipping that to my country and the costs doubles =S A project that actually caught my eye was this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beagle_Board Do you think that, given the fact it can run android and ubuntu (took a look in their website) it would also run trisquel???
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
https://www.fsf.org/resources/hw/single-board-computers
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
I haven't checked Parabola yet, mainly because the website has a unknown certificate. sudo apt-get install ca-certificates
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Great to see so many updates coming in but why did this even happen? I also thought that there is some kind of automatic synchronization with the Ubuntu repositories. What if this happens again in the future? I would be very happy to get an official response to clarify this stuff. Is there any way for us to help?
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Yes, solve this bug https://trisquel.info/en/issues/4528# become a associate member https://trisquel.info/en/member# :)
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
I doubt that more money will directly lead to more updates, though I agree that it is a good way to show your love. If it's true that only two guys are running this whole distribution, there needs to be another solution. Either: 1.) More core members 2.) A way to sync the Ubuntu repos with the Trisquel repos
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Well, I hesitate to become a member because of the concept of the beneficial dictator for life. I don't know quidam and he may be a nice person, but I don't think a dictatorship will encourage more people to join the development team or is a good idea for any other reason. Why not make community decisions? This would be the best solution for everyone. Since quidam founded the project and put much effort in it, I'm sure he want it to become a success, and for this we need decisions pleasing the majority of users with respect to a kind of manifest. I think of ubuntu. Same problem here. The dictatorship had disastrous consquences. I don't trust this concept.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Moot point with intel (and amd?) AMT/vPro. There is no security anymore. Even if you de-provision it fully, it can always be remotely re-enabled. Nothing at all we can ever do about this. All haswell mobile CPU's have vPro / Intel AMT. It is a hardware level backdoor that cannot be fully disabled (is remotely re-enable-able by an autorized (not by you) person) Do not use it. Just like how we do not own our children, our betters do, just how we do not own ourselves, our goverments do, we do not own our machines. Our masters do. They tell us what we can and cannot do in life. There is nothing we can ever do about it other than kill ourselves. This is their world, there is no escape. They say, for instance, you can't marry a little girl... well then you can't. Because they said so. They rule us, they say they can have access remotly to our RAM, gfx card memory, remote vlc? Does anyone want this? No. Doesn't matter what we want. Never did, never will. Toss it in the trash, that laptop of yours. It is a traitor against you.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Intel decides AMT will be in all it's CPUs. AMD too. They decided that because our feminist(not really related but they are)/neo-liberal/good-person rulers decided they must put backdoors in hardware. You have to deal with that dictatorship. Why complain now? The society(people in government) tells you what to do in every subject of your life. You HAVE TO OBEY. You don't and your raped in prison and then die from aids. Why complain about trisquel?
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
I guess one solution would be to stick with older machines for as long as possible. If you can, avoid laptops, and use a tower with free software only friend hardware. It's not perfect but is a solution. As for laptops, if you can get one from a trusted friend (someone who you know didn't mess with the Bios) you can try to get one second hand with 5 years or so. It won't be a gaming machine of course, but thanks to free software you can still keep using it for 10 more years to come (i am being optimistic, lol). Libreoffice, simonlistens, GIMP, firefox, etc, allow us to use a lower end computer, so you don't need to buy new computer with that technology. And what's it with you wanting to marry little girls? You have been talking about that for some time now, how old are you? You can't find anyone your own age? There must be some women who will get your eye, why want little girls? -.^
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Well, for those who want the latest and greatest all day, every day, there's always Parabola.. =P Flip side of course being that you'd have to properly install and configure Parabola. That being said, quite frankly, anyone stupid enough to allow a something as powerful as java to be executed willy-nilly by any random website... As for hardware without vPro or UEFI or any of that garbage.. Hey, suppose one could always get a NanoNote or a YeeLoong. =P
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
I totally agree with you, and I forgot to mention yeeloong. But as far as I know, yeeloong won't run trisquel. =S What are those nanonote?
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
True. =x But you could put Parabola or gNewSense on there. It's a tiny pocket computer which can run LibreWRT. Open hardware and the whole shebang. Think it's more or less out of production at this stage though. =( http://en.qi-hardware.com/wiki/Ben_NanoNote
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
There's a big difference between Canonical, who runs Ubuntu, and Trisquel. Canonicial puts a lot of effort into taking the Debian repositories and making them stable for Ubuntu. These Ubuntu repositories are also used by Ubuntu deriatives like Linux Mint and Trisquel. The big difference is that Linux Mint uses the Ubuntu repositories directly and Trisquel takes the Ubuntu ones and cleans them out for non-free packages. Canonical is not dictatorship because it is a company and not a one man show. On top of that, you don't have to use the main Ubuntu OS and there are many deriatives (like Linux Mint) that only use Ubuntu as a base and add their own changes. They provide an excellent base and large choice of packages to use. The problem with Trisquel is that there's an extra effort to sanitize Ubuntu to make it fit into the FSF's guidelines on what a true free operating system is. Its just that one guy who handles the project and thinks he can do it alone. It would be fine and dandy if this was his full time job, but it isn't. He has a full time job working for another company and Trisquel is only maintained in the free time he has from that. There was a point where Trisquel felt more active and moving to LTS releases was going to soften the blow on the maintenance on this project. I truely champion them for keeping it stable, but they also need to keep the people that use it secure by keeping the repositories up to date.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
I went to read about Nano, it seems interesting, but yes, still can't think of a use for it. Maybe soon I hope. As for the Yeeloong, I don't really think I would change from Trisquel to GNewSense. Just no comparison. Trisquel is more or less updated, it has a solid users community, I think gnewsense delivered last stable release in 2009. IF they started providing updates every six months, maybe that would be worth considering. Too bad I think getting a yeeloong would cost around 400 euros. =S
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Well, least you can be sure it's not phoning home or anything.. 'cause there are no radios.. And u'know. Music player and graph calculator I guess. =P True, true. Not to mention it's quite a significant compromise in terms of hardware. x) There is active development going on with gNewSense though, 3.0 Beta 2 got out a few weeks back. =x And at the risk of repeating myself and sounding like a shill, Parabola - It's rollin' baby. =P The 8089D goes for 265 euros from tekmote. =P
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE SYNC THE TRISQUEL REPOS!!! I second this!
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
I think Trisquel needs more developers, when you see the develpoment team, you see only two people managing the project. The good part is that even with this limitation, Trisquel is one of the best pure free distros... but it still needs more.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Problem seems to be solved now - updates for abrowser, openJDK, kernel and more today. Abrowser is now at 22.0, OpenJDK7 at u25 :)
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Hooray! That's great news! Trisquel is once again keeping up with the needs of the users. Still the best operating system that I could use right now ;)
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
I thought the Trisquel repos automatically mirrored the Ubuntu ones daily and blacklisted certain packages from being integrated. If that was the case, updates like OpenJDK would show up that day and .it a week later.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
There is much to learn, young padawan.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Well, this is indeed a very important issue, and we should all look at it as a priority. I don't have Java installed (any kind of it, free or not), and I don't have flash either (gnash or flash or whatever). And for people who don't need them, I would suggest you uninstall them. Another thing I have noticed some time ago... when I try to install UFW, it says that it's not a verified source or something like that. Every time I install Trisquel it happens. Why? I thought all the packages in Trisquel repositories were from the same source and all verified by Ruben...??? So, yeah, if you don't need openjava and gnash, uninstall them and that will actually make you a little bit safer. Also, using UFW and ClamAV might actually help a little bit. But, still, we need to help Ruben make Trisquel more up to date in terms of security issues. Problem is, how? I don't know programming enough to help him =S
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
I fixed the OpenJDK issue by creating a separate ubuntu.list file in my /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ directory with my local Ubuntu mirror for 12.04 to nab the main and universe repos. I had to manually import the Ubuntu Archives key (since Trisquel does not have it), install OpenJDK u25, disable the Ubuntu repos, and re-run apt-get update. Want to know another issue? There were at least 30+ updates for software like apt that were available in Ubuntu 12.04 that were not yet available for Trisquel 6. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE SYNC THE TRISQUEL REPOS!!!
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
You are totally right! I also started a thread about this some time ago. [1] This really needs to be adressed! Is there anything we as normal users could do? [1]: https://trisquel.info/en/forum/trisquel-update-policy
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Yeah, being stuck at 21 for Abrowser isn't helping either. I may have to manually update my OpenJDK from the Ubuntu repos if the Trisquel ones are updated. I've been using the latest stable Chromium (v28) from https://launchpad.net/~alt-os/+archive/chromium while waiting for Abrowser to be updated to 22.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
Maybe Trisquel should put Abrowser on the long term support release of Mozilla.
Re: [Trisquel-users] Trisquel is less secure than Ubuntu at this point
The ESR versions of Firefox still get updates, but those updates are point releases like 20.1 and 20.2. I don't see the point of moving to ESR since the browser has to be cleaned by Ruben with each update either way.
