I’m also in favor of hardware passkeys & 2FA. They help alleviate vendor-lock in and are more secure.

Usually only YubiKey is mentioned. I do prefer NitroKey’s aims of transparency. If other users know of other vendors please list them.

From what you’ve written you’ve conflated separate things. Passkeys are not related to biometrics. Google wants your biometrics. Full stop. Google is a surveillance mega-corp. Full stop. Why are you still using Google? or Microsoft, which you clearly are uncomfortable with? That’s rhetorical. Don’t answer that. No one’s interested in your pissing and moaning for why you can’t leave this abusive relationship. Passkeys say nothing about biometrics. They’re unrelated.

The surveillance corps implementation of passkeys will always be in their interest. Hardware passkeys are superior to device-locked passkeys that are stored in a TPM. Such schemes are nothing but vendor-lock ins. Oh, I don’t want to buy a new phone; all my logins are stored on this phone. It’s too much hassle. I can’t leave Google’s Android, it contains all my credentials securely. Hardware passkeys have no such friction. I can use them on any hardware.

The surveillance corps software-implementation is dodgy too. They’ve opted not to use some of the spec, which objectively weakens security. They’ll claim it’s for user-ease and whatever else they want to spout. The ease of silently using passkeys to access data they shouldn’t, or to migrate the users passkeys to their new Google android phone–only Google android can migrate you to a new Google android device. You need Google android. Hit me harder daddy.

I mean, really, what are you trying to ask? You clearly don’t trust these surveillance-companies. Passkeys are a good. Just like cryptography is just maths. There’s no issue with the maths or passkeys. The issue lies in these mega-surveillance-corps that parasitically extract value from your computers–whether that’s a desktop, laptop, server, smartphone or some other mobile-computer. You pay for the hardware, electricity, data-connection and you labour on them and these corps take everything from you. That’s why Alphabet, Facebook and whatever other shit software-company has valuations in the billions or trillions.

Security is something they want. They want to be the sole holder of your information. They want a market monopoly. Strong cryptography helps them do that. Much like how a serial rapist and the police both like steel bars: one to keep their victims locked up in, the other to keep their victims locked up in too… huh… point is everyone likes strong cryptography.

Is no one going to point out the irony? of asking complete strangers, via the internet, for personal advice? The chatbot is completely divorced from reality, but internet-strangers are completely divorced from your reality too. They don’t know anything about you or your partner, except for that which you disclose and who lies on the internet?

Plot twist: the internet strangers are chatbots.

I’m not clicking the links, but writing to a well-known publisher isn’t different: one’s asking remote strangers to comment on a local issue. They’re completely blind to the reality on the ground. All three scenarios are probably a product of an increasing social-isolation, of which technology might be to blame… (or capitalism, cough, cough)

Everyone has their heads bowed, staring at their phones. I’ve seen joggers with their head up, looking straight ahead: at their phone. A critique of remoteness and technology’s ability to fool the human-psyche into believing a remote thing is actually a local thing would not be amiss.

I would like to direct the reader to Yacy. It’s a free-software, self-hosted search-engine. Users have the option to peer with other users, creating a larger decentralised search engine.

Build it. Use it. Promote it. Finance it. Bupf it, for short. Build the future you want or piss and moan endlessly.

That’s romanticizing history. When communication via post became economically feasible for a large number of citizens its surveillance began–in the 19th century. I’ll make a more contentious point: religion played the role of what modern-states now call domestic intelligence. The state’s desire to control (that’s what surveillance is about) has always been there. It’s an intrinsic aspect of a state. Technology only allows what would have been economically unfeasible to now enter the realm of feasibility.

What one should take away from this article is that: Signal is a central point that can be compromised silently; Signal has the power to revoke your access to its software at any time (leaving the Canadian ‘market’). Both point to Signal’s users being rubes. They are not in control of the software and are subjugated by a private dictatorship branded ‘Signal’. Users should not be concerned about the government’s will here (it’s the same; it has not changed). Users should be concerned that the private dictatorship–that they paradoxically hold dear–is a private dictatorship.

Signal users yearn to be subjugated and told sweet lies.

Ah yes, the classic: I want privacy, but I actually don’t, because it’s too inconvenient. There’s technical reasons why any network that prioritizes privacy will be slower than those that don’t. i2p has a technically superior model to tor’s onion network. It’s good software.

I would say liberate yourself first. Buy computers that can or already are liberated (that is to say computers running libre software). Once liberated you will understand how it is done and can then teach others how to do it too.

You should not be concerned about politics here. Already the people are rendered mute under Western democracies.

Even if you don’t think it’s folly to persuade others, what are you persuading them of? To use software that you yourself don’t use? Build it. Use it. Promote it. Can’t write software? Donate to the orgs that are writing libre software. Can’t run it? Haven’t you liberated your computer? If you have you can run it. Can’t promote it? Are you not able to communicate?

Ditch Apple and Google. Use GrapheneOS. Use a linux powered mobile-computer like Pine Phone. Use encrypted overlay networks to communicate over the internet like i2p (it has a Java implementation and a C++ implementation), tor, hyphanet or my personal favorite: GNUnet. Heck, use all of them!

I will preemptively address an infantile critique of GrapheneOS: it uses Google branded hardware. File off the logo if it disturbs you so much. This critique fails to address the reality: hardware is subsidized by technological behemoths like Google because their product is not the hardware, but the software that is built off data collected by the hardware. An argument could be made that taking advantage of that subsidization maliciously damages Google more than purchasing non-subsidized hardware. Something to think about. Regardless, Foxconn makes both Google Pixels and Apple Iphones. The branding blinds people of the reality.

Anyway… rambles, rambles. It’s not about convincing others, it’s about you doing what you think is the correct thing to do.

You are absolutely correct, which is why this and even your comment is a distraction. Regardless of how much we dislike the sophisticated surveillance regime you can’t deny material reality: it exists.

The correct thing to do is to materially destroy it. Its current existence is the threat, not a theoretical oh, it might be compelled to do something to me. The actual fact it could do something to you now is the issue. It is doing things to you right now. Every user of these commercial entities labours freely for these trillion-dollar companies.

E.g.: A Google android phone provides data to Google which they use in their commercial mapping-software, which they sell access to. “Oh, but I get free-access to Google maps; if my mobile-computer spies on me to improve Google maps then it’s beneficial to be spied on.” Such reasoning is trotted out ceaselessly, but it ignores the commercial nature of Google: other companies (& governments) are required to pay a license to use it. You’re a rube labouring for free. You are an employee of Google, only you don’t realise it; neither does the law. You materially impoverish yourself whilst enriching a capitalist corporation. The data you’re giving away has value. Even if you want to deny that value consider the following: you pay for the hardware, the data connection and the electricity that enables the extraction of that data. !Socialise the losses privatise the profits! Free access to Google maps isn’t charitable. It’s a requirement to extract labour from you that improves Google maps. (EDIT 3: this is an important point that I wish to impress upon the reader: that improvement allows Google to demand higher prices from other commercial entities [& governments]. If the product stagnates then the price does too. To prevent this you are required to purchase increasingly sophisticated mobile-computers to extract increasingly sophisticated data sets.

Have any of you used commercial software recently? Consumer computers are fucking super-computers, yet Microsoft windows and Adobe’s PDF reader lags like a motherfucker dancing in molasses under the ocean in a pit of sand–just wtf!)

You might as well praise your employer for providing shelter whilst at work. How charitable of them. Gee golly, I sure am pleased my employer lets my use a building whilst I labour for the owners. Gee golly, they’re so charitable that they’re not demanding a rent. (Satire.)

I will reiterate: it exists now. Ask yourself what can you do now to weaken what it is you’re fighting. This cartoon distracts from the fact that Apple is a private surveillance-corporation. Don’t use Apple controlled computers. That is the correct line.

Yes, your data will be inadvertently collected by rubes, but this cartoon says nothing about that fact. This cartoon is just a distraction. It shouldn’t be applauded by those who want privacy. It should be critiqued for what it is: a distraction.

EDIT: Apple would love this cartoon. Apple do not want to share their power with any government. This cartoon creates social-pressure to ease governmental oversight of their private, for profit fiefdom. This cartoon only aids Apple. Critique this cartoon.

EDIT2: just look at the fucking cartoon: Apple’s mobile-computer is on the left, brightly light. It’s white like virgin snow. It’s painted as a good thing. Apple’s mobile-computer is a private prison. It’s anything but good.

FINAL EDIT: on the topic of Google maps. I was shocked to learn that a store’s manager refused to comply with Google’s terms for being listed on Google’s maps. The shock was not from their refusal, but the requirements Google were demanding. They wanted a video that showed how to access the store (located within a larger commercial building) and privileged information. This was dressed up as attestation that they were in fact an employee of the store and therefore the data was valid and correct. However the privileged information they wanted was absurd: passwords to store safes and company logins.

That was what I was told by the manager. For those who work within businesses do these requirements sound familiar? Is Google actually demanding such information as a requirement for new listings?

Build the alternative and use it.

You’re either the dictator of your computer or you’re not. A government ‘forcing’ companies to hand over logs describing what happened on their commercial platform means you have not even begun the fight. It’s a complete farce.

It’s a distraction from the fact all these companies are rolling in capital by manipulating their users–oh, but I want to be manipulated by daddy Apple or daddy Discord, just not daddy national-government. What?

It’s a fucking larp. How many of you will agitate against this, but you will still use your fucking Discord/Apple/Google/Meta whatever?

Oh, the government is going to hunt you down for using different software that is non-compliant with legislation? What? In what fantasy land? Wake me up when there’s boots on the ground invading people’s homes by authorities to check what software I’m running on my computer. It’s never going to happen.

EDIT: Sorry, the more I look at this cartoon the more this pisses me off. It’s painting Apple as an innocent. It’s fucking not. Come on, dear artist, labour more to paint mega-corp dictatorships as benign, aloof, white, middle-class targets. Get fuckt.

one common runtime

The year is 2XXX. The one common runtime to run them all is within reach… we all just need to use XXXXXXXXXXXX. Scratch that, we’ve just built XXXXXXXXXX. Hang on, scratch that… we’re now all doing something different.

Just a throw away comment, but as a user I do avoid flatpaks. It takes forever to install anything and it’s just absurdly ugly in design. The benefit is… ? I genuinely don’t know.

The people who want software to just run, whilst having no understanding of a computer are actively being herded towards entirely different ecosystems by capital. They’re already patrons of businesses. Capital spends a portion to ensure they stay patrons. No one is paying advertisers to advertise GNU+linux. No one is paying OEMs to ship GNU+linux. No one is lobbying governments to entrench GNU+linux into organisations.

Those that want it to ‘just run’ on a unix derivative are probably a very queer minority.

I am absolutely acrid towards computer users. Look, it’s just like the app store! Just press this button and it will work! That’s all software: press the correct button and it will work. Users don’t give a fuck. Libre software will never entice users like commercial software does because only commercial software can pay for users.

Capitalism & software on a comment about flatpak’s removed design and the common runtime to rule them all. I’m getting lost; what’s new. Does flatpak actually have any momentum? AppImage? I genuinely don’t know.