| web | https://polarhive.net |
| 📹 | https://polarhive.net/videos |
| :pixelfed: | https://polarhive.net/photos |
| GPG | 0x78DBFBE8B325A5A9 |
Here's an idea for a talk by me at #fosdem Interesting?
Title
"Tightening every bolt"
Abstract
Things to do in order to sleep well while having your C code in twenty billion installations. A talk about what the curl project does to minimize security risks: Security, Safety, Reproducibility, vulnerability handling and the processes and tooling around it.
Jukebox: listen to your LastFM recommendations on linux
⭐ https://odysee.com/@polarhive:e/jukebox-demo-lastfm-linux:d
⭐ https://tilvids.com/w/1Th4Xh7iTAqEvSgAhoshSp
imo: fedi needs to make threads users feel welcome. The *users*; not meta/or it's advertisers.
If people push for a splinter-verse, meta is the only one who wins. They get to exploit their 1B+ userbase — while fedi just complains:
https://github.com/mastodon/mastodon/issues/25450
It's a chance to bridge-networks and siphon people into the fediverse (the one not controlled by meta). Why would someone use the ad-powered threads app over tusky—if there is no lock-in?
Even if you completely block meta at your end, how are you going to block every-other instance that decides to federate with #threads
For example: I opt-out of search-engine indexing on my mastodon instance.
But when I receive replies on posts, with users from other instances. The mastodon opt-out rules don't propagate and posts, eventually show up on google & duckduckgo.
I don't mind: If you've made a public-post you shouldn't expect any privacy as such, this is social-edia, not DMs.
daniel:// stenberg://
nemo
Nathan
