141–150 of 350 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think Hanlon's razor is outdated. Plausible deniability is the new meta. On top of that, the maintainer seems intent on not fixing the problem.
I think that in today's polarized world, it's very much needed. I think we need to look at each other's fallibilities and failures, and not hate each other for it. But the issue needs to be taken care of, especially since it's known since 2009. It's ridiculous that everyone let if fly for so long.
> Or maybe StarDict would have started asking for special permissions to let it work on Wayland, and users would have accepted those defaults the same way they currently do.
Yes, that’s what it would do. Its installer might even configure that special permission automatically, without user intervention.
Malware’s gonna mal. Wayland might help defend against some things, but it’s not going to defend against packages installed as part of the distro.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Malicious intent written in the package description? I would think that really unlikely. I think it's just a cultural difference. Sogou, a super popular Chinese input program for Windows iOS and Android does the same with everything you type and nobody cares.
I think so too. It's cultural difference, and ignorance at most. I doubt the maintainer has control over that two random dictionary websites, or was tasked by them to do this or anything like that. They are just a different person, and they didn't give a fuck.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Such responses to me are proof of malicious intent.
There are dozens of chrome extensions that translate (read: submit to untrusted server) on hover / highlight / context menu / textarea edit / etc. It is implied, that user acknowledges this functionality and accepts the risk. This includes untrusted server (because that's how they proxy requests to Google/Bing/Yandex Translate without exposing API keys). Security illiteracy? Yes. Malicious intent? Probably no. Does b…
I think the bar for trust in terms of evil intent is on the floor.
A problem for those 178 people... But on a global scale this isn't really a concern.
While I have a lot of respect for the effort that goes into Debian, I always disliked this kind of "maximalism" from the package manager. Oh, the user wants "foo"? Let's install every software that might be even remotely useful somehow in combination with foo! Oh there is a network daemon in there? Fantastic, let's start it immediately! I know that there is a flag to disable the installation for "recommended" package…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
“the plans and the demolition orders have been on display at the local planning office on Alpha Centauri for fifty of your Earth years. If you can't be bothered to take an interest in local affairs...” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1Ba4BbH0oY
For the uninformed: this is a quote from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We're not going to agree on that. The response is clearly there to point to a fig leaf instead of saying 'oh, oops, we will make this more obvious in the UI', the software is working as intended: as a way to gain access to more data. Note that clipboard data can be just about anything and is a valuable dataset, more so if the source of the data isn't aware of being a source, besides, there is no history so you won't…
[flagged]
There are numerous privacy issues in distros, some known, most probably unknown, some examples from Debian: https://wiki.debian.org/PrivacyIssues Luckily there are things like opensnitch that can block some of these issues: https://github.com/evilsocket/opensnitch
Your link is about privacy issues in upstream software that Debian hasn't sufficiently worked around yet . The main advantage of the Distro model (as opposed to developer-maintained package ecosystems) is exactly that there is someone protecting you from questionable software "features".
Debian does not mandate anything about privacy in its Policy Manual (which are the standards for selecting and packaging software that maintainers must adhere to): https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/search.html?q=priva...
There's also no insistence on privacy in the Debian Social Contract or DFSG (not that these would be appropriate places for it, they're mainly about licensing)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
“the plans and the demolition orders have been on display at the local planning office on Alpha Centauri for fifty of your Earth years. If you can't be bothered to take an interest in local affairs...” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1Ba4BbH0oY
For the uninformed: this is a quote from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.