deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
More info:
https://asahilinux.org/2023/08/fedora-asahi-remix/
https://social.treehouse.systems/@marcan/110825522690584932
Some key points:
I think for some cases the app already in the App Store has ads and other monetisation (e.g. IAP). In these cases the app is modified to remove these and allow you to get the benefits that were behind a paywall in-game
I think it’s because in the discussion threads on Fedora Discussion, this point has already been raised and a “somewhat satisfactory” answer has been given?
Michael had been working on open source projects and Fedora since before he was a Red Hatter. They have a clause in their code of conduct that for community projects, they are allowed to go against Red Hat’s interests.
I believe that Red Hat has been pulling funding from Fedora, and thus people in the Fedora project wants to collect additional metrics to persuade Red Hat otherwise.
I believe that drafting a revised proposal is a normal part of the Fedora change process https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/program_management/pgm_guide/changes/, and I think they allow anyone to raise change requests, and change requests don’t mean they are a done deal. All change requests are reviewed by FESCo.
I’m new to this, so please correct me if I’m wrong.
Hi! It’s called iCloud Private Relay and it’s detailed here: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1402274867366477831.html
Apple’s stated reason for not covering mail, contacts and calendar is “Because of the need to interoperate with the global email, contacts, and calendar systems, iCloud Mail, Contacts, and Calendar aren’t end-to-end encrypted”. I think it’s worth mentioning that critical bit of context. https://support.apple.com/en-sg/guide/security/sec973254c5f/web. Apple does have to balance usability and security, though this might not be as secure / private as you or I would like.
I think it’s a little misleading to say they considered backdooring it. They intended to scan images for CSAM before uploading it to iCloud Photo Library. A lot of speculation was they wanted to E2EE photos but were worried about the reaction from the FBI and other bodies, given the FBI had pressured them on this before, and so settled on this compromise. If they had managed to do this, they wouldn’t be able to access the photos after they had been uploaded, hence, they had to scan them prior to the uploading.
They attempted to do this with a very complex (and honestly still relatively privacy-preserving) way of comparing perceptual hashes, but perhaps they realised (from the feedback accompanying the backlash) this could easily be abused by authoritarian governments, so they abandoned this idea.
I would assume that a company like Apple is getting significant pressure behind back doors, and they cater to an audience that is unforgiving for any slight reduction in performance or ease-of-use, and wants security features that are almost fully transparent to them. Given these constraints, I’m not sure they can improve much faster than what they’ve demonstrated. Smaller, open-source projects probably don’t have these constraints.
deleted by creator