Nah im dumb and my brain just didnt realise that the words are in wrong order

An ordinary Extinction -Architects

deleted by creator

Would be a nice plot twist, but do you habe any sources for your claim? If this is real I would like to know more

True, but the config settings should be good Form the get go, that’s the reason the app exitists after all and ublck and noscript are installed fast. But thanks for the tip :)

Had the same, promptly uninstalled, didnt find infos.

If i remember correctly, gog allows this

Well opressivs governments dont work by serving good policys to the people, they work by blaming a part of the people for all problems and then promsing to get rid of them/punish them. A scapegoat basically. The opressors don’t make it better for the people, but the people are happy because the ones they think causing their suffering get punished.

Historically this has been the communists in Nazi Germany, or faschist italy, modern faschists try to make gay people and people from the far east this scapegoat atm.

The problem is: the scapegoat is never the real cause of the problem. After taking them all to the kz, and life for people still not getting better you need a new one. For Nazi Germany those where Jewish people, just because of their religion, has Hitler proposed the “kommunistisch-jüdische-weltverschwörung” (world conspiracy of Jews and communists) When after the pogromes stuff still would get better, they would blame everyone not arian. (Not blonde, blue eyed, northern heritage)

If a fascist government tries to exclude you or not is just a matter of time, at some point they will rum out of scapegoats and come for you.

You never know which aspect someone picks to exclude you (gender, political view, haircolor, Parents, lastname, sexual preferences, religion, mental health, physical health etcpp.) So it’s better to not have someone gather all that info about you in the first place.

I am with you in this one!

If something is “easy to use” this includes the time you need learn said thing.

Drinking rahmen from the bowl is easier then using chopsticks (even if you are more elegant with chopsticks)

Driving automatic is easier then driving manual (even if you may be more efficient with manual if you practised shifting a lot)

Walking is easier then flicflacs (even if you may be faster with flicflacs if you practised a lot)

Using Ubuntu is easier than using arch (even if arch gives you more control and opportunities if you understand it)

Well its shown to you at the bottom of the screen what it does…

And if you want Ctrl v,c,s etc. To work like in word etc you can always use nano --modernbindings

Well okay by that logic playing Beethoven on piano is super easy

Better? Maybe!

More efficient? Surley!

But easier?! Hell no! Easy means you can use it without a lot of training or studying. It is self explanatory. And there is no way on earth that vim is easier than nano. I don’t need to know anything to use nano I need to check docs for hours before I can even start using vim

Dunno what you used, but nano is literally a text editor that may be simple simple but it just works. Shortcuts are shown to the user, buttons work like you expect them to (arrow keys, ESC, shift, etc)

With vim you open it and if you haven’t read 5pages of doc you won’t even be able to close it again. I see that its useful for power users, but for casuals who just want to edit a config once in a while nano is absolutely the way to go imho

You keep referring to concepts like “Keys encrypted with itself” “Tpm are by design encrypted”

When you don’t really say anything from value.

Not every “encryption” is the same.

When we talk about safe encryption we talk about file system level encryption of a system with safe algorithms like aes and a long enough random password (the key). this is safe.

If you store the key unencrypted on your phone, this encryption is no longer safe.

If you don’t know the 16 random digit key it HAS to be on the phone and it CAN’T be encrypted “by itself” because you would no longer have any means to decrypt it.

It could be encrypted with a pin, but again, then its only as strong as the pin, and I don’t know how long an only numeric pin would need to be to withstand modern brute forcing, but I doubt a relevant percentage of people have that kind of pin.

You can’t explain how this would be safe, so you just come at me with russels teapot and say “well you can’t prove its not safe” (which is true because I’m no security expert, but someone with enough knowledge could certainly) and lash out at me “acting in bad faith” because I don’t jump through your hoops of passive aggressive misunderstanding.

All I can do is refer to experts, who found things like CVE-2022-20465 - a bug which allowed lockscreen bypass.

As you could have googled that yourself, but you ask this just to throw me off.

But if you want to keep using your google android and bitlocker win and feel safe, its not my problem.

How do you think encryption works?

What do you think does a lockscreen?

deleted by creator

If you think TPMs are always encrypted, a key can be encrypted “with itself” and still be any use to you and android system pin is secure you are right. Might also believe in santa

The device needs to be physically accessed and modified and then unlocked in order to exploit it.

Exactly the service the company offers

Yes it is a vulnerability but with those steps you could also just solder a keylogger to the keyboard.

This is not a hot take at all!

Sure thing, it is equally hard to confiscate/steal a device (if the user notices you just shrug) and open it no user input required And Stealing the device without the user noticing Solder a keylogger, get it back to the user without them noticing and having them put in their password, then steal the device again so you can use said passwort

I totally agree

You are right in a sense of: If the TPM holding the keys were itself encrypted with a strong password, this would be still be considered secure. You are wrong in the sense of: lenovo sells a device, tells its users its encrypted, their data is safe. None can steal their data

in reality the data can easily be accessed, which could be considered as “cracking the device/bypassing the encryption” because what lenovo prevent was someone ripping your ssd l, but not just decrypt it because the encryption was not implemented securely.

I don’t want to debate the security of a luks Linux volume or veracrypt windows laptop, (even though even those are in theory vulnerable to highly targeted and skilled things like cleverly exploiting e.g the logofail bug)

My point isn’t that there are no ways to have a secure system, my point is that the percentage of truly secure systems is low