Also, many proprietary softwares rely on open source libraries. So unless they catch, patch, and do not contribute those fixes, proprietary will be at least as vulnerable as the oss they depend on.

Good point. We’ve gone full circle, or line, on that one.

Naomi Klein refers to the right co-opting left phases (triggered, othered, fake news, etc) as “pipiking.” I think doing the reverse is hilarious, but also imagine a future where it results in an Idiocracy-like dialect 💀

I’d bet the sprawl and heat make biking impractical.

Pop’s the distro that made me go full linux. It let me tinker and have the linux experience without a lot of setup or preexisting knowledge.

Shoot. Sorry I couldn’t help then. Good luck with your troubleshooting. I know it can be a very frustrating issue.

Had a similar problem on Pop_OS. Seemed to be an nvidia diver issue. Suspend would stop working after a driver update and sometimes go away after another update. This happened 2 or 3 times. There were also some logs about nvidia suspend issues. My troubleshooting was unsuccessful and iirc, it was complicated to keep pop from updating so I eventually swapped nvidia for amd and it stopped being an issue.

How likely are you to recommend Arch to a friend or colleague? 1, not likely, to 5, extremely likely.

Personally, I’d start with his wikipedia page, and the pages for his books. The people you’re talking to are likely caught in the fascism algorithmic funnel and have only watched videos rather than reading themselves. So they probably don’t have a deeper understanding than what wikipedia provides. That’s part of the appeal of conspiracy theories, that they’re bite-sized talking points that fit neatly together inside even the smallest minds.

I’m willing to bet there are people who have already done the work for you and picked apart the books, and there’s probably conspiracy theorists who have come up with stories for each of those points. And now we’re approaching the point of Branolini’s Law, “The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than that needed to produce it”

Beyond the scope of your Q, but if I could offer some advice: Instead of arguing, ask interrogating questions, as though you trust them and you’re genuinely trying to understand all the contours. You’ll quickly find many holes in their weak foundation. Success is bringing some awareness to how weak their info is. It’s like asking someone to show you around their messy apartment and now they’re a little embarrassed, so hopefully they’ll clean up or stop talking about it.

Honestly, though, I’d have those convos in person (and worryingly, i have). Algorithmic social media is not built for deep thought or meaningful discussions. IMO It’ll just suck up time and energy that can be better spent elsewhere.

Yup! If you have it on steam you can unzip the exe and take a peak at his code.

And Marty would be 57 years old

The future is not evenly distributed.

Were you working with data back then? Marketing? You want to argue that there was the same public knowledge around digital data in 2005 (when web 2.0 was in its infancy) as there is now in 2025? Most books I’ve read on the topic weren’t even published till the late 2010’s. Surely there was a moment or experience that woke you up to the importance of privacy and the capabilities of data. Not everyone has had experiences like that, even today.

I’m not dismissing personal responsibility, I was just shocked that the dominant, first reaction was “morons” and not “these companies are immoral, and don’t deserve our trust.” I want privacy as the default and not an overwhelmingly individual arms race against corporations and professionals. The latter is going to lose, and that will hurt the rest of us. If we want the former, as a community we have to get off our high horse, get on the ground, and grow by welcoming those that got burned into the fold. edit: grammer

Reminds me of the quote “If you tell the truth, you don’t have to remember anything”

If you read terms of service and think anything is clear then you have a gift that not many possess. I hope you can appreciate that. Sure, there are a lot of folks who should know better, but there’s also a lot who are bad at navigating these things. It’s by design. I think it benefits us to be sympathetic and welcoming, and to direct our anger at companies and laws. We need the privacy mindset to spread and fast. I think I understand where you’re coming from though. It’s so frustrating to care about privacy more than most people.

Hardly. It stated that you could request to have the sample destroyed and your data removed. it’s also been revised multiple times. You read the contract, no?

You read the privacy policy & ToS fine print of every product, service, software you use? And every revision. Even when it’s not broadcasted? The contract / “informed consent” model is totally broken. You really want to build your stance on these issue around the claim it’s a reasonable system anyone can and should have to navigate?

deleted by creator

You’re right. My mistake. I was going off memory and 2009 came to mind, but now that you mention it I do remember hearing about tech for the 2008 election- but I heard that years later, after cambridge analytica. All’s to say, it was emerging around that time and it wasn’t a big, public announcement. People around the epicenter knew but most were in the dark. I know i was, till the mid 2010’s. Since then I have 0 trust in big tech/most corporations, but I’ve definitely made my share of mistakes and wish there were more protections/public education.

Yes, I know. As I mentioned in another reply, I was mentioning it only to give a sense of timeline and hype. Not a justification. Nice gotcha, but misses the broader points.

I take your point and I don’t disagree about personal responsibility or that there are a lot of people who ignored all the warnings. And it’s all the more frustrating to be ignored, or labeled as paranoid, by those same people. I was mostly reacting to the pervading unsympathetic response I was seeing.

A lot of people in the privacy community are seeing this as an established professional or someone with the experience/insight/know-how, and from that vantage point it seems so obvious. But it’s a journey. I can think of a few moments that woke me up to privacy and it’s importance. Most of those were just tinkering on personal projects. There’s no general education on this stuff and I really don’t think many folks have had the fortune to encounter this info in a way that they grasp, but maybe I’m kidding myself - i’ll leave room for that. I mentioned Time for a sense of the timeline and sentiment, not as a meaningful endorsement. I know I was ignorant about most of this stuff as late as 2014 and I still have so many gaps.

Maybe this 23andme BS is an experience that turns many more towards privacy, in which case i hope they’re met with a welcoming message like, “that sucks, this is why we have to educate and protect ourselves” instead of an alienating “no shit, idiot.”

Hindsight is 20/20. ITT lots of folks proud of themselves for not falling into this trap, but try to understand, 23andme was named “invention of the year” by Time in 2008. That’s before [edit: around the time] google and facebook had begun monetizing private data. Data privacy, or even the power of data itself, was hardly appreciated by private companies let alone in the public consciousness.

Orphans, people with absent parents, decedents of slaves, the list goes on for folks who would understandably go for an affordable way to access their genetic history. Sure, there were plenty of folks since then who had all the information and still went for it, but what about all those who became aware of it too late and when they requested their data be deleted were told it would be kept for 3 years!

I’m saddened to see more victim blaming here than anger at the ToS/privacy policy fuckery and a complete lack of consumer protection.