I would personally skip anti-consumerism because I believe it is a misdirection from anti-capitalism, not really a stepping stone. See friend.camp/@nasser/1082558452…
One of the things we did for TROMjaro tromjaro.com/ , our custom Linux distro, is to pack Firefox with adblockers and tracker blockers and such. Plus github.com/libredirect/libredi… so you can redirect popular websites to their "trade-free" alternatives (where you don't have to trade your data or attention). And at first I did this because I wanted my parents to stay away from the pesky world of ads and data mining.
Advertising is immoral. The idea of pushing information by throwing money at it is immoral. It is a form of corruption. Valuable information flows by itself, without sponsors, ads, product placements and all the other alternative forms of shitting-in-your-head.
open source doesn't mean everyone can go in, edit the code and introduce malicious bits of code. You can fork it, but you have to release it as a different software under a different name, and nobody is gonna install that. Since the source code is open and typically there are many independent contributors to a project, each one of them can take a look at it and spot bugs or malicious bits of code and remove them. This is not true for proprietary software, so generally speaking, open source software is a lot safer than proprietary. Though of course other aspects play an important role as well, such as corporate interest, how many people actually look at the code, how the review process is handled and so on
Most of the android system is open source and I to my knowledge, there is no browser left, that isn't at least partially open source. If you try to avoid open source, you can't browse the internet.
Open Source makes it a little easier for everyone to spot vulnerabilities. But closed source doesn't make it impossible, only a little bit harder. Bad actors still easily find security holes in closed source.
As a result, you have more good actors looking for security holes (and bugs) in open source software. Also, if a good actor finds a vulnerability or a bug, in open source software, they often just send a fix together with the report. In proprietary software, they can only report the vulnerability and hope for the best. Security holes in proprietary software have been known to be open for years, just because the maintainers didn't want to spent the money/time to fix it.
Hypolite Petovan
in reply to My First Nightjar • • •clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy 🇸🇪ðŸ‡ðŸ‡°ðŸ’™ðŸ’› likes this.
Tio
in reply to My First Nightjar • •My First Nightjar likes this.
Camel
in reply to My First Nightjar • • •My First Nightjar reshared this.
caffeine
in reply to Camel • • •The idea of pushing information by throwing money at it is immoral. It is a form of corruption. Valuable information flows by itself, without sponsors, ads, product placements and all the other alternative forms of shitting-in-your-head.
Suitably ballyhooed
in reply to My First Nightjar • • •reshared this
Dr. Percy reshared this.
Yaoi Box Balloon
in reply to My First Nightjar • • •Kevin Karhan
in reply to My First Nightjar • • •Bonus Points when you rollout #AdBlockers on every network and system per default.
I.e. #pfBlockerNG on #pfSense / #OPNsense + #uBlockOrigin on Browsers as well as #AdAway on #Android...
My First Nightjar
Unknown parent • • •Pauli Schute ✅
in reply to My First Nightjar • • •Adblock Browser.
My First Nightjar
Unknown parent • • •My First Nightjar
Unknown parent • • •My First Nightjar
Unknown parent • • •Since the source code is open and typically there are many independent contributors to a project, each one of them can take a look at it and spot bugs or malicious bits of code and remove them. This is not true for proprietary software, so generally speaking, open source software is a lot safer than proprietary.
Though of course other aspects play an important role as well, such as corporate interest, how many people actually look at the code, how the review process is handled and so on
My First Nightjar
Unknown parent • • •Till likes this.
Till
Unknown parent • • •@Edwin🌸🙀 @Descentury's bass player
Most of the android system is open source and I to my knowledge, there is no browser left, that isn't at least partially open source. If you try to avoid open source, you can't browse the internet.
My First Nightjar
Unknown parent • • •Till
Unknown parent • • •@Edwin🌸🙀 @Descentury's bass player
Open Source makes it a little easier for everyone to spot vulnerabilities. But closed source doesn't make it impossible, only a little bit harder. Bad actors still easily find security holes in closed source.
As a result, you have more good actors looking for security holes (and bugs) in open source software. Also, if a good actor finds a vulnerability or a bug, in open source software, they often just send a fix together with the report. In proprietary software, they can only report the vulnerability and hope for the best. Security holes in proprietary software have been known to be open for years, just because the maintainers didn't want to spent the money/time to fix it.
Hypolite Petovan likes this.
puppy who sometimes logs off
in reply to My First Nightjar • • •Lizzy
in reply to puppy who sometimes logs off • • •puppy who sometimes logs off
in reply to Lizzy • • •this one has been working well for me
gitlab.com/magnolia1234/bypass…
magnolia1234 / Bypass Paywalls Firefox Clean · GitLab
GitLabIshmael
in reply to My First Nightjar • • •My First Nightjar
in reply to Ishmael • • •