[Trisquel-users] family privacy Again

[s***@vmail.me]

Please excuse my english grammar, I am not an english native speaker.
y entire family use facebook (it is all my fault for creating accounts for
them years ago), now they use Instagram and twitter, but my mother is very
addicted to FB--or just all of them. Now when they do pictures they just
upload and upload it to those privacy violating services, I many times do not
want to be in those pictures and I avoid it as much as possible however my
mother is too too angry that there are some repercussions to me for not
participating in those activities(pictures, selfies etc, it is like they are
the new teenagers than I), it appears that I am now the black sheep of the
family. Is there any way for me to convince them that using and uploading
pictures to those services and internet are bad? I always say to them about
the global surveillance disclosures but they seem to ignore and defeat me
with the statement, "They have nothing to hide so they do not care, or that I
am just a small fish to catch, or worse I am just being paranoid." Anyway I
showed them the picture of zuckerberg with the Instagram 500M likes, in the
background his macbook webcam is covered with tape(it does not have any
effect to them) it was posted in the other topic "Mission impossible: family
privacy" but it that topic but my situation is quite the opposite.

[Mason Hock]

Facebook is designed to addict its "users" with what its former vice-president describes as "dopemine-driven feedback loops."

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/dec/11/facebook-former-executive-ripping-society-apart

Your family's rationalizations for subjecting themselves to Facebook's abuse are typical of any kind of addict. It is important to understand how difficult it is for an addict to acknowledge that they are no longer in control of their own lives.

It sounds like you have tried to reason with them and it has not worked. This is unsuprising but you should not give up. While you cannot control the way they think, you can provide context that may help them eventually reach the same conclusion independently.

It will also help to identify the need that Facebook fulfills for them and suggest healthier alternatives. A friend recently told me that he began transitioning to vegetarianism not by removing meat from his diet, but by introducing tofu into his diet. It is easier to eliminate something from your life when you have the security of a familiar replacement. Depending on your family's situation, there are several replacements you may try to introduce them to before you attempt to convince them to abandon Facebook completely.

(1) Offline interaction. If you live near your family, you may propose spending more time with them in person. You do not have to present this as a replacement for Facebook, because it is worthwhile in itself. If you do not live near your family, frequent phone calls may be enough. You say that your mother is angry at you for avoiding Facebook. Perhaps this is because Facebook has convinced her that it is her only way to have a relationship with you. If so, it is understandable that you avoiding Facebook would scare her. If you can show her that Facebook is unecessary to maintain relationships she might feel less dependent on it.

(2) Online alternatives to dedicated "social media." Email and XMPP can serve many of the same functions as Facebook with less risk of those needs being associated with a proprietary interface. Email photos to your family. Encourage them to chat with you via XMPP. Maybe act a little annoyed at *them* if they refuse to connect with you this way. Facebook did not invent chatting, blogging, or sharing photographs. Their innovation was aggregating these technologies into an addictive interface. You can show your family that they do not need rely on Facebook for these features.

(3) A libre, decentralized replacement for Facebook. I am aware of three: Diaspora, Friendica, and GNU Social. Of these, Diaspora will probably be the most appealing to your family. Many Diaspora pods support cross-posting to Facebook or Twitter, meaning that your family may post photos to Diaspora for you to see that are also posted to Facebook for their other friends to see. Ideally they would not provide any information to Facebook, but this will at least allow them to do so without engaging with Facebook's addictive interface and introduce them to a more freedom-respecting replacement. I have some concerns about Diaspora. Although it is free software and I suspect no malice from the developers, I worry that it unintentionally inherits some addictive antifeatures from Facebook in an attempt to replace it. That said, it is far better than Facebook, as any accidental antifeatures may be removed by exercising freedoms 1 and 3, while Facebook will continue to refine its intentional antifeatures and will not allow you the freedom to remove them.

Let me know if I can clarify anything I've written. It is difficult to have a discussion like this in a language that is not your native one. It is admirable that you are participating in a forum that is not in your native language in order to help your family.

[s***@vmail.me]

1)I am living near them so there are offline interactions.
2) Alternatives I am currently trying to make them use alternatives such as
Linphone, Seafile and Mumble.
3)I currently run a gnu social server but the interface is not facebo*k like
so I think I may try to create a disapora pod.
Thank You your advice

[Caleb Herbert]

What is Seafile?

[Caleb Herbert]

Post by Mason Hock
Facebook is designed to addict its "users" with what its former vice-president describes as "dopemine-driven feedback loops."
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/dec/11/facebook-former-executive-ripping-society-apart
Your family's rationalizations for subjecting themselves to Facebook's abuse are typical of any kind of addict. It is important to understand how difficult it is for an addict to acknowledge that they are no longer in control of their own lives.
It sounds like you have tried to reason with them and it has not worked. This is unsuprising but you should not give up. While you cannot control the way they think, you can provide context that may help them eventually reach the same conclusion independently.
It will also help to identify the need that Facebook fulfills for them and suggest healthier alternatives. A friend recently told me that he began transitioning to vegetarianism not by removing meat from his diet, but by introducing tofu into his diet. It is easier to eliminate something from your life when you have the security of a familiar replacement. Depending on your family's situation, there are several replacements you may try to introduce them to before you attempt to convince them to abandon Facebook completely.

Yes. As a vegan, I can also attest to this. It's easier to stop eating
a food when it's crowded out, rather than taken out. When there are so
many different types of new beans, grains and milks to try, it's easy to
just "accidentally forget" to consume the old stuff.

Post by Mason Hock
(1) Offline interaction. If you live near your family, you may propose spending more time with them in person. You do not have to present this as a replacement for Facebook, because it is worthwhile in itself. If you do not live near your family, frequent phone calls may be enough. You say that your mother is angry at you for avoiding Facebook. Perhaps this is because Facebook has convinced her that it is her only way to have a relationship with you. If so, it is understandable that you avoiding Facebook would scare her. If you can show her that Facebook is unecessary to maintain relationships she might feel less dependent on it.

Facebook employs the same techniques to stay in people's life. When I
quit, it sent me email saying "Your friends miss you."

Post by Mason Hock
(2) Online alternatives to dedicated "social media." Email and XMPP can serve many of the same functions as Facebook with less risk of those needs being associated with a proprietary interface. Email photos to your family. Encourage them to chat with you via XMPP. Maybe act a little annoyed at *them* if they refuse to connect with you this way. Facebook did not invent chatting, blogging, or sharing photographs. Their innovation was aggregating these technologies into an addictive interface. You can show your family that they do not need rely on Facebook for these features.

These won't work as a replacement. During the course of in-person
interaction, the need for them will naturally grow, and only then should
you introduce them. "Well, if you really NEED to do this online instead
of in person, I GUESS we can use Syncplay and VLC."

[i***@posteo.net]

I have very little to add except for a caution: if you are a minor and maybe
even if you aren't, please do not email pictures of yourself to Facebook
addicts.

I am sad that my own non-local family can't know what my little boy looks
like, but they can't be trusted with photographs and my primary
responsibility is to my minor child.

If that makes strangers and random facebook addicts think I am an extremist,
it is still the least bad option that is available to me at the present time.

It's not just language,it's culture.

I don't want to make you sad. My minor inconvenience of being the black sheep
could be your horrific personal tragedy for all I know.

Mason is absolutely right that our families are addicts. If you are a
teenager, you deserve better.

[Mason Hock]

Post by i***@posteo.net
I have very little to add except for a caution: if you are a
minor and maybe even if you aren't, please do not email pictures
of yourself to Facebook addicts.

You are right of course. Sadly, this did not even occur to me, because for myself and for everyone I know it is far too late to prevent Facebook from collecting our complete facial biometrics. Even if I had not been peer-pressured into joining Facebook as a teenager and spent several years addicted, many photos of me have been uploaded to Facebook without my consent and remain there even now that I have deleted my account. Even the people I know who have never used Facebook have had many photos of themselves uploaded with their names attached. They and I can try to avoid situations in which Facebook's facial recognition software can be used against us, but there is nothing we can do at this point to erase their profiles of us.

I don't know if it is even possible now to protect a child from being profiled by Facebook until they are old enough to protect themselves, but if you do you will have given your child a choice, which is a great gift and something I never felt that I had.

[Caleb Herbert]

Post by Mason Hock
I don't know if it is even possible now to protect a child from being profiled by Facebook until they are old enough to protect themselves, but if you do you will have given your child a choice, which is a great gift and something I never felt that I had.

Friends, esp. girls, will take photos of each other once they get mobile
devices. This will involve lots of peer pressure. Even if the kid
doesn't have FB, their friend will, and that friend will pressure them
into letting them post it on their Facebook feed.

[s***@vmail.me]

I can say that I am a teenager. I do not post photos to FB but my parents did
(it was long time ago, but I manually deleted them)
They now post photos of our other child family members and even has a
facebook for them, they cheated the birthday so they created the facebook
even though I am against it.

[Caleb Herbert]

Post by i***@posteo.net
I have very little to add except for a caution: if you are a minor and maybe
even if you aren't, please do not email pictures of yourself to Facebook
addicts.

Thank you for mentioning this. I never thought about simply not
distributing photos to Facebook users. This is a sane policy. I like
it.

It may also carry he incidental benefit of pressuring them to leave
Facebook: "I won't give you photos as long as you are being used by
Facebook."

[g***@riseup.net]

forced by family to do something that totally goes against ones ethics and

integrity

I am sorry for you m8. Get a job maybe and your place so you can distribute
fuckoffs in complete tranquility

Is there any way for me to convince them that using and uploading pictures

to those services and internet are bad?

Well, you can try.. You can also try climbing the Everest. Few succeed.

I always say to them about the global surveillance disclosures but they seem

to ignore and defeat me with the statement, "They have nothing to hide so
they do not care, or that I am just a small fish to catch, or worse I am just
being paranoid."


See the first two answers I gave.

cheers

[s***@vmail.me]

I currently cannot get a job since I am still studying.

[Caleb Herbert]

Post by g***@riseup.net
I am sorry for you m8. Get a job maybe and your place so you can distribute
fuckoffs in complete tranquility

I'm not the OP, but I am in the same boat. I have a job, but it doesn't
pay enough for me to support myself fully. Transportation is especially
expensive! (More than $210 US each month.)

[Cassandra of Troy]

One more one more thing:

You said:

"it is all my fault for creating accounts for them  years ago."

I don't remember if I said the same thing on the older thread you just
read but I know I have said it many, many times.

My mates have told me to "stop beating myself up over it" just as many
times and they're going to say the same thing to you.

Maybe a better way of rephrasing this idiom is "It's not your fault."

If you were a very young English speaking child, I would try to make you
laugh with a bit of culture jamming, but I wouldn't want my mates on
this forum to misunderstand me, because some of them may have to work
jobs they hate so they can follow Supertramp83's excellent advice upthread.

But if you are a teenager, you do not have the same resources as 30+
year old adult who is being paid to use advanced psychological
manipulation techniques developed by criminal organizations to brainwash
activists. You just don't.

I wish I had the power to save my family too.

It's a marathon, not a sprint. I need you to be strong so you can save
your own children and maybe my grandchildren because I won't always be
around.

Thank you for going to the herculean effort it must have taken to try to
help your family. I admire you, sir.

[s***@vmail.me]

I read the other thread and if not because of that thread I may have given up
long time ago, so thank you for inspiring me to not give up.

[s***@gmail.com]

How does one go about responding to comments such as:

"I have learned about so many things and met all new kinds of people on
Facebook."

"Through Facebook, I am able to share works that I have created quickly and
to many people."

"Most of the Web, including Facebook, exists because it is funded by
advertising. In order to keep it going, it might be necessary to allow data
to be collected."

"Personalisation is useful; it provides me with tailored content that appeals
to me. Anyway what's the harm? Don't we pick and choose what we want to see
in real life?"

I often respond to these comments by saying that the "price" one pays by
using Facebook is their own personal information, which is being disseminated
to who knows where, and that the "benefits" of Facebook are never enough to
outweigh the abuse that it inflicts on its users. Yet, I feel that these kind
of responses don't have much effect.

Are there any better arguments one can use in response to the above comments?

[s***@anchev.net]

It seems to me you expect from people here to tell you how to talk to your
family so that they listen to you and stop using Facebook.

Ask yourself:

Why do you want to modify the behavior of others? How is that different from
what Facebook does? Are you able to love someone if he does stupid things or
if he has his own beliefs and addictions? If you are - why don't you give him
the freedom to live as he wants? It is good to share, to explain danger in a
moment when the other is open to listen. But if he doesn't
- argumentation will not make him, however clever it may be.

[Mason Hock]

Post by s***@gmail.com
"I have learned about so many things and met all new kinds of
people on Facebook."

Facebook uses its psychological profile of you to determine what information to display at what time in order to addict you. As a side effect, you may find much of the information interesting. However, relying on this side effect as a source of information is quite dangerous, as you make yourself vulnerable to manipulation.

For instance, Facebook suggests new articles based on which ones you have clicked on in the past. (Note that even if a news article is posted by a friend, you should consider it a suggestion from Facebook, as it was Facebook's decision to select that post of your friends to show you at that moment.) The more you participate in this feedback loop, the more similar these articles will be to each other. You may miss important information that Facebook does not show you because it does not think that seeing it wil make you more addicted to Facebook.

As a result, it is easy to become trapped in a "bubble of ignorance" whereby all of the information you see conforms to one veiwpoint and you are not exposed to other perspectives. When appplied selectively, this technique is a form of mind control that may be sold not only to advertisers but also political campaigns or governments in order to radicalize users who hold certain veiwpoints. Facebook has also found that by displaying a message to a set of people, they can great increase that set's voter turnout. This gives them the power to swing elections.

Post by s***@gmail.com
"Through Facebook, I am able to share works that I have created
quickly and to many people."

You should be very careful when posting your work to Facebook, as you may be giving Fecbook certain legal rights to your work. http://www.nyccounsel.com/business-blogs-websites/who-owns-photos-and-videos-posted-on-facebook-or-twitter/

If you feel certain that you require Facebook to promote your work or share some other information publically, consider this compromise suggested by RMS to do so in a way that protects your personal information and does not empower Facebook via the Network Effect. https://stallman.org/facebook-presence.html

Post by s***@gmail.com
"Most of the Web, including Facebook, exists because it is funded
by advertising. In order to keep it going, it might be necessary
to allow data to be collected."

This is just arguing with reality. Plenty of websites exist that do not collect your personal data. It is possible to provide relevant ads without tracking or data collection. The Trisquel website has a ThinkPenguin ad that is sure to be relevant to many visitors because Trisquel and ThinkPenguin have similar audiences. It is also possibe to have a website that contains no ads. For example, the Diaspora pod that I use has no ads. I suspect that this is true for most Diaspora pods.

Post by s***@gmail.com
"Personalisation is useful; it provides me with tailored content
that appeals to me. Anyway what's the harm? Don't we pick and
choose what we want to see in real life?"

The difference is that with Facebook you are not the one who picks and chooses. You have influence, but ultimately Facebook decides. Any benefits of Facebook's "personalization" are a side-effect. The only reason it shows you anything you want to see is to tempt you into giving it control, at which point it can expose you to what it wants you to see.

Post by s***@gmail.com
I often respond to these comments by saying that the "price" one
pays by using Facebook is their own personal information, which is
being disseminated to who knows where, and that the "benefits" of
Facebook are never enough to outweigh the abuse that it inflicts
on its users. Yet, I feel that these kind of responses don't have
much effect.

You are absolutely right. People should value their privacy regardless of the practical consequences of losing it. However, providing specific examples of ways in which Facebook can harm people may help the issue seem more "real" to them.

[Adonay Felipe Nogueira]

One thing that I find hilarious: Facebook may take and reuse all your
multimedia that you publish there, but Facebook's terms of service says
that you are only allowed to publish things that have you as the only
author. Effectively, one cannot legally share in Facebook works under
CC-any-variant, GPL-and-family, and other licenses.

Post by Mason Hock
Facebook uses its psychological profile of you to determine what
information to display at what time in order to addict you. As a side
effect, you may find much of the information interesting. However,
relying on this side effect as a source of information is quite
dangerous, as you make yourself vulnerable to manipulation.
For instance, Facebook suggests new articles based on which ones you
have clicked on in the past. (Note that even if a news article is
posted by a friend, you should consider it a suggestion from Facebook,
as it was Facebook's decision to select that post of your friends to
show you at that moment.) The more you participate in this feedback
loop, the more similar these articles will be to each other. You may
miss important information that Facebook does not show you because it
does not think that seeing it wil make you more addicted to Facebook.
As a result, it is easy to become trapped in a "bubble of ignorance"
whereby all of the information you see conforms to one veiwpoint and
you are not exposed to other perspectives. When appplied selectively,
this technique is a form of mind control that may be sold not only to
advertisers but also political campaigns or governments in order to
radicalize users who hold certain veiwpoints. Facebook has also found
that by displaying a message to a set of people, they can great
increase that set's voter turnout. This gives them the power to swing
elections.
You should be very careful when posting your work to Facebook, as you
may be giving Fecbook certain legal rights to your
work. http://www.nyccounsel.com/business-blogs-websites/who-owns-photos-and-videos-posted-on-facebook-or-twitter/
If you feel certain that you require Facebook to promote your work or
share some other information publically, consider this compromise
suggested by RMS to do so in a way that protects your personal
information and does not empower Facebook via the Network
Effect. https://stallman.org/facebook-presence.html
This is just arguing with reality. Plenty of websites exist that do
not collect your personal data. It is possible to provide relevant ads
without tracking or data collection. The Trisquel website has a
ThinkPenguin ad that is sure to be relevant to many visitors because
Trisquel and ThinkPenguin have similar audiences. It is also possibe
to have a website that contains no ads. For example, the Diaspora pod
that I use has no ads. I suspect that this is true for most Diaspora
pods.
The difference is that with Facebook you are not the one who picks and
chooses. You have influence, but ultimately Facebook decides. Any
benefits of Facebook's "personalization" are a side-effect. The only
reason it shows you anything you want to see is to tempt you into
giving it control, at which point it can expose you to what it wants
you to see.
You are absolutely right. People should value their privacy regardless
of the practical consequences of losing it. However, providing
specific examples of ways in which Facebook can harm people may help
the issue seem more "real" to them.

--
- https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno
- Palestrante e consultor sobre /software/ livre (não confundir com
gratis).
- "WhatsApp"? Ele não é livre. Por favor, veja formas de se comunicar
instantaneamente comigo no endereço abaixo.
- Contato: https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno#vCard
- Arquivos comuns aceitos (apenas sem DRM): Corel Draw, Microsoft
Office, MP3, MP4, WMA, WMV.
- Arquivos comuns aceitos e enviados: CSV, GNU Dia, GNU Emacs Org, GNU
GIMP, Inkscape SVG, JPG, LibreOffice (padrão ODF), OGG, OPUS, PDF
(apenas sem DRM), PNG, TXT, WEBM.

[g***@riseup.net]

Post by Mason Hock
Facebook uses its psychological profile of you to determine what information

to display at what time in order to addict you.


Yes. And it should be very scary for everyone with two brain cells.
Unfortunately the average facebook user has only one.
They are profiling you so accurately your mother would be surprised. They
know more about you than you know about yourself. This information not only
contains your weak spots, it's also there to stay, forever. At each point
some degenerate power (all powers tend to be) to be can use it against you.
We know for a fact that laws change in time. We know for a fact that what is
considered normal today might be considered suspicious tomorrow. What was
illegal yesterday might be legal today and might again be illegal tomorrow.
Being openly gay on Facebook? You might find yourself in big trouble some
day. Just a random example..

Does this activate one of your cells? Mine are having a party while I write
this.

Being able to predict future actions is being able to chill history into what
I call 'the eternal present'. No change will ever come, no revolution, if the
current state keeps on. If you can survey everyone all the time you can spot
the whistleblowers and the activists in a jiffy and with no effort
whatsoever. This is effectively the death of the mere idea of democracy, let
alone its actual establishment.

But what I find to be the most dystopian and bad thing is... you are also
(generic facebook you) getting addicted to constant feedback of artificial
emotional satisfaction. this is indeed the real hard drug of any social
network if and when misused. I know this for a fact. I am ashamed to admit
this but when I first joined diaspora I was in a quite difficult period of my
life, I found beautiful 'people' there (read ideally constructed images of
what I deem a decent human being' or 'a pleasant and funny human being' is)
and was very well welcomed when I joined. I am very ashamed but I will admit
it: many of the first posts I posted there were motivated by this feedback. I
liked being liked. Everybody does. We all want to be loved. And when we find
no love or not enough love in our 'real life' we tend to use surrogates. It's
human nature. It's the main reason of **every** drug addiction case.
Fortunately I stopped doing that, I soon realized what I was doing. I hated
my self for that.
This feedback of likes and hearts and sweet words is a big fat lie, it does
not exist. It's a heavy drug, and you need more, always more. Being a bitch
is very wrong. Being a slave is even worse. I find the average facecuck user
a combination of the two. Don't sell yourself, don't let the others define
your value or likeability. Be asocial. If you can't be asocial (I can't) then
be honest to yourself.

Post by Mason Hock
For instance, Facebook suggests new articles based on which ones you have

clicked on in the past.

It's called bubbling. It's a huge problem indeed. Above I mentioned the
'impossibility of change'. This is just another one, but a more subtle one.
If you (generic facecuck you) always only read what you want to read and hear
what you want to hear, how in the world can you change your mind, how in the
world are you going to learn new things or correct your little wrong ideas
and opinions? If your values and ideas are never faced you are much less than
you could be. In other words facebook makes sure you stay ignorant and
'monolithic'. You'll never grow up, you'll never develop a critical though.

Post by Mason Hock
manipulation
trapped in a "bubble of ignorance"
this technique is a form of mind control

Exactly, excellent mate!


But you are making me verbose and I don't like verbose, goddamit :/

[Mason Hock]

I don't mind verbose.

$ supertramp -v

Post by g***@riseup.net
'the eternal present'

Word. This is my greatest fear, that the tyranny of mass surveillance and proprietary software will reach a level of efficiency such that it will be impossible to revive freedom or democracy or human dignity. In my mind this is a fate bad as extinction. The free software movement has achieved a great deal and continues to make progress, but its success is far from inevitable. We must win before we reach the point of no return. I don't know when that point will be, but I think about it in years not decades.

Your experience with Diaspora confirms another fear of mine, which is that although Diaspora is free software and its developers are probably well-intentioned, in attempting to replace Facebook they have unintentionally copied many of its malicious features. It is certainly not as bad as Facebook, and its decentralization prevents any addiction to it from being exploited by any one power, but it could still be psychologically harmful.

[s***@anchev.net]

It has always been the case in human history that when a particular entity
gains power over certain resources it results in suppression, dictatorship,
exploitation, misery etc. Yet people keep repeating the nonsense about how
good it is to be ambitious, successful, "more than others", "a winner" (among
loosers) etc. At the same time people keep talking about democracy. Has there
every been democracy, really? This is a beautiful dream, just like communism.
If there was democracy, the concept of free software wouldn't even need to
exist as something opposing non-freedom. And we wouldn't be in this forum
banging our heads over various issues.

[g***@riseup.net]

Post by Mason Hock
It is certainly not as bad as Facebook, and its decentralization prevents

any addiction to it from being exploited by any one power, but it could still
be psychologically harmful.

Yes. I shall point out that I wasn't experienced at the time and was not
prepared to the powerful influence a social network can exercise over one's
psyche, especially in a weak moment. In fact, Diaspora was the first (and
only one so far if we exclude gnusocial which I logged into like 5 times..)
social network I used. It's a decent place but it certainly can be misused
and it can indeed be psychologically harmful as you point out.

Also, as you highlighted previously, being able to manipulate, control and
direct large swarms of people by a single malicious central power is as bad
as it can get.

Have you read this old article about facemoot?

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jun/29/facebook-users-emotions-news-feeds

[i***@posteo.net]

Mason, some humans are more vulnerable to these malicious features for more
or less or analogous or metaphorically similar reasons as why some perfectly
nice and heroically brave decorated combat veterans might prefer to politely
decline your invitation to a fireworks show and why other perfectly decent
attractive and unattached humans who greatly respect your intelligence,
humour, compassion, and thoughtfulness might prefer to decline your
invitation to "watch a movie and chill".

It's not your fault. None of it is. I just wanted to point that out.

Akito, the thread you read was locked to avoid necro trolling. We had no
intention of misleading you with unrealistic optimism when we wrote our
posts, but I do deeply regret if I accidentally and personally did so every
bit as much as I regret all the personal details that I can't unpost.

I don't have time to play "more obsidian than thou"; suffice it to say that
FindEssential and I are singing the same old song, just in different
dialects.

[Mason Hock]

Post by i***@posteo.net
Mason, some humans are more vulnerable to these malicious features

My fear is that, even if there currently still exist people who are not susceptible to Facebook's manipulation, one day soon Facebook will acheive such efficiency that this is no lnger the case. Facebook isn't a naturally occuring substance like alcohol that happens to have some addictive properties that affect some humans. It is specifically designed to exploit vulnerabilies in the human brain. Its manipulations are like those of a cult or the abuser in an unhealthy relationship, but with more potential. Cults are only able to mentally a significant number of people by limiting themselves to those with severe and obvious vulnerabilities. Emotional abusers are able to acheive control over otherwise healthy people, but they rely on intimate knowledge of their victim to do so, limiting the number of people they can exploit. Mind control has always existed, just not efficiently enough to instantly work on an arbitrary individual. No longer. Only two things are required to have a mechanism for perfect mind control: (1) automatic detection of an individual's vulnerabilities and (2) automated exploitation of these vulnerabilities. Facebook has almost perfected (1). While (2) is sure to advance much further, it has already come far enough to be very dangerous. I can't stress enough that Facebook already has the power to decide the outcome of a close election: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/10/can-voting-facebook-button-improve-voter-turnout/

[s***@gmail.com]

Eben Moglen believes that 2022 is a good estimation of the maximum length of
Facebook's lasting, and he seems to have a deep knowledge of the issues in
hand

What is your opinion,
given the threats/dangers you mention?

[s***@anchev.net]

He seems to assume that free software gives him privacy which is rather
superficial considering the issues mentioned in this thread:

https://trisquel.info/en/forum/freedom-security-technology-what-can-we-do

I also see that his optimism about what he wants makes him oversimplify
fairly complex technological problems and reduce them to things like "plug
server".

A few key moments:

5:15
"Firefox frees people from a net created by Microsoft"

Yeah, like ****

Loading Image...

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1432248


22:05
"My telephone calls are secured because they are placed through VPN and free
software VoIP"

"All my surfing is done through proxies..."

He has obviously not explored into uBO and uMatrix and is stuck with ABP.

"I do HTTPS Everywhere, I never send anything unencrypted"

Well... CAs are not necessarily trustful OR independent.
https://blog.torproject.org/life-without-ca

"My web server is on my private VPN sitting somewhere in North America"

The land of the free :)


28:20
"Those of us who don't do technology must do teaching"

and he suggest that the teaching should be about asking "the question". But
the problem with this is that he also seems to teach what the answer is which
deprives the questioner of the possibility to look freely for oneself and to
find a different one. He suggests existing formulas like Diaspora etc. There
is danger in suggesting recipes because people easily stick to them and there
is no real question. So the question must come without an answer, otherwise
it is an imposition, not a free observation but a directed one.

Too many talkers, too few of them touch the actual essence of the problem.

[f***@runbox.com]

Too many talkers, too few of them touch the actual essence of the problem.

* Eben Moglen has spent his professional life struggling for privacy and free
software. Since you seem to dismiss free software at ever turn, you may be
interested to know that among many many other things, he was Phil
Zimmermann's defense lawyer.

* Freedombox, the "plug server" you make reference to, is a real project, it
works and is being developed.

* Firefox is free software. If it had not been for Firefox we would probably
all be using Microsoft's browser by now. Firefox is far from perfect, but you
seem to have a dogmatic and visceral hate for it.

* Moglen started his life as a computer programming language designer. He is
a technically competent person.

* You spend your time here talking other people down.

* You speak of Eben Moglen as if he were some sort of snake oil peddler.

* The only thing that came out from that web browser forum was you
disparaging Magic Banana after he created two scripts to start your supposed
project.

* What have you done to place you on this pedestal where you look down on
everyone else, including those who have dedicated their lives to ensuring we
have choices in how we do our computing?

* You need to come off your high horse.

[s***@anchev.net]

I was answering Aristophanes. Did you read anywhere a question "How should I
spend my time" or "What do I need"?

If it had not been for Firefox we would probably all be using Microsoft's

browser by now.

Opera was there before Firefox. (fwiw)

Firefox is far from perfect, but you seem to have a dogmatic and visceral

hate for it.

I have shown actual facts proving that Firefox disrespects user privacy by
default. If facts are a dogma to you there is hardly any point in trying to
participate in a meaningful discussion (or in any discussion at all). So far
you have shown nothing but praising authorities.

I don't care who E.M. is and I have never given him personal qualifications
(as you do all the time here). I commented on the video from my point of view
- exactly what Aristophanes asked for. If you have a problem when someone
asks something and another one shares observations - you may better check
what is the purpose of internet forums.

You spend your time here talking other people down.

Look who's talking.

The only thing that came out from that web browser forum was you

disparaging Magic Banana after he created two scripts to start your supposed
project.

If you are trying to belittle what was shared, I don't really care. I am
sharing for those who may be interested, not for some contentious persons who
troll around like the politicians - patting themselves on the back and
spitting vitriol at everyone else.

My "high horse" is actual facts. You seem to have nothing to share except
unsolicited critique and disrespectful personal attacks. So your posts
neither answer any specific question, nor give any useful information.

[f***@runbox.com]

* Opera is not free software.

* Firefox is not perfect. You seem to live in a completely binary world. What
satisfies your standards? If nothing, what are you creating that satisfies
your standards.

* I can see you don't care who Moglen is. I do and I have a problem with you
calling him a "talker" when he has done much for free software and privacy.

Look who's talking.

* I have spent weeks reading your posts, disparaging people I hold in high
regard and who have always been helpful with me and others in this forum
(such as Magic Banana), putting down projects I care about such as free
software, etc. Against my better judgement, I have lost my patience and have
been baited by your continued needling.

* I am not belittling what was shared, and quite a few people, Mason and
Magic Banana among them, were very supportive of your efforts. You had no
kindness for them either.

* How was I disrespectful to you?

[s***@anchev.net]

All forms of proprietary firmware are not a free software either. So talking
about software freedom at ring 3 when the system is compromised at ring -3 is
nonsense. And defending such talking shows lack of understanding, ironically
by a person who blames others for not understanding well enough
technicalities. You just proved again what I said - that you are here just to
pat on the back the authority which gives you self confidence and a basis to
disregard anything else.

Post by f***@runbox.com
Opera is not free software.
If it had not been for Firefox we would probably all be using Microsoft's

browser by now.

which implies that if it was not Firefox there would be only Microsoft
browser. Looking at chronology of events has nothing to do with software
freedom. Hello?

Post by f***@runbox.com
You seem to live in a completely binary world

Again: look who's talking. When some software is mentioned you immediately
jump to that "free" or "non-free" without even looking at any context.


One last time: my reply was to Aristophanes and again this is way off-topic,
even to the sub-thread you are replying to. I don't have the time for silly
arguments.

[f***@runbox.com]

You conflate free software, privacy and security. You also do not (or refuse
to) understand that one program can be free even if others are not and we can
still speak about the software freedom of that program.

I do not need to look at any other context to say that a program is free
software, and I have yet to come across a case where I have a choice between
a free and proprietary program and I did not choose the free one. It is
exactly the same case with firmware: whenever I can use free firmware, I do.

If you look at browser market shares, back when IE had >75% of the market,
Opera had something like 0.1%. That's what I meant by we would probably all
be using Microsoft's browser. In any case, I am very thankful that Firefox
and its derivatives exist.

Not sure what you mean by ring 3. First time I hear that term. If you mean
freedom 3, I don't understand what "when the system is compromised at freedom
3 is nonsense." Without freedom 3, you cannot improve the program and share
your improvements.

What authority do I pat in the back?

I don't have the time for silly arguments.

A large number of your posts over the past weeks seem to contradict that
statement.

[Adonay Felipe Nogueira]

Post by f***@runbox.com
Not sure what you mean by ring 3. First time I hear that term. If you

He refers to the issue of MINIX's existance in ring -3 sector of all
computers with Intel Management Engine ([1]).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MINIX#MINIX_3 . See the last paragraph
of that section and the references it points to.

[Adonay Felipe Nogueira]

Post by f***@runbox.com
* Freedombox, the "plug server" you make reference to, is a real
project, it works and is being developed.

Yes, Freedombox really exists and has releases, however I must note that
it's not a free/libre system distribution, so we mustn't recommend it
here, and so far I have received no indication of this status changing
([1]).

Post by f***@runbox.com
* Firefox is free software. If it had not been for Firefox we would

It unfortunately isn't free/libre, due to what is exposed in
([2][3]). And before someone else does: please don't provide
over-simplified description of the work free/libre forks do related to
their non-(free/libre) originals.

[1] <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/freedombox-discuss/2017-April/007982.html>.

[2] <https://www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/>.

[3] <https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/IceCat>.
--
- https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno
- Palestrante e consultor sobre /software/ livre (não confundir com
gratis).
- "WhatsApp"? Ele não é livre. Por favor, veja formas de se comunicar
instantaneamente comigo no endereço abaixo.
- Contato: https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno#vCard
- Arquivos comuns aceitos (apenas sem DRM): Corel Draw, Microsoft
Office, MP3, MP4, WMA, WMV.
- Arquivos comuns aceitos e enviados: CSV, GNU Dia, GNU Emacs Org, GNU
GIMP, Inkscape SVG, JPG, LibreOffice (padrão ODF), OGG, OPUS, PDF
(apenas sem DRM), PNG, TXT, WEBM.

[f***@runbox.com]

however I must note thatit's not a free/libre system distribution,

Wow, I didn't know that. It's a project started and led by Moglen AFAIK. I am
surprised it is not free software. Your footnotes are missing, do you have a
link to this information?

It unfortunately isn't free/libre, due to what is exposed in ([2][3]).

[2] and [3] are unavailable. AFAIK, Firefox source code is free software. You
are right, the trademark and recommendation of non-free addons make it
inconvenient to excercise freedom 3, which is why forks exist. In any case,
my point to Joe was that it is a valuable project, faults nonwithstanding.
Thanks for the clarification though.

[Adonay Felipe Nogueira]

For those which reported missing references for the message I'm replying
to (my own one), here is the references. Now they should appear normally
for those reading using the forums.

[1]
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/freedombox-discuss/2017-April/007982.html
.

[2] https://www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/ .

[3] https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/IceCat .
--
- https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno
- Palestrante e consultor sobre /software/ livre (não confundir com
gratis).
- "WhatsApp"? Ele não é livre. Por favor, veja formas de se comunicar
instantaneamente comigo no endereço abaixo.
- Contato: https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno#vCard
- Arquivos comuns aceitos (apenas sem DRM): Corel Draw, Microsoft
Office, MP3, MP4, WMA, WMV.
- Arquivos comuns aceitos e enviados: CSV, GNU Dia, GNU Emacs Org, GNU
GIMP, Inkscape SVG, JPG, LibreOffice (padrão ODF), OGG, OPUS, PDF
(apenas sem DRM), PNG, TXT, WEBM.

[f***@runbox.com]

Thanks Adfeno. From reference [1] I conclude the problem is Debian is not on
the list of FSF endorsed distributions. Freedombox is composed of free
software as far as I can see. Debian without non-free repositories is free
software too. Given there is no alternative that is more freedom respecting
than Freedombox for a plug server, I do not see how it would be unethical for
me to recommend it. I even wonder if it could be setup on Trisquel (not sure
if all the dependencies are in the Trisquel repos). The conclusion though is
Freedombox can be run without proprietary software. Is this correct?

[Adonay Felipe Nogueira]

Post by s***@anchev.net
"Firefox frees people from a net created by Microsoft"
Yeah, like ****

I do agree with you, although it must be noted that the upload date was
2012-06-01, and unless I'm mistaken (please investigate this or correct
me if I'm wrong), back then we were unaware of the freedom issues of
Firefox.

Besides, we had only Microsoft as the major incumbent, in recent years
it has been proven that Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google are also part
of trash. And just last year we found even more --- hint: not just
Netflix but every techonology or service provider that breaks attempts
of federation or that traps customers with non-(free/libre) software ---
([1]).

Post by s***@anchev.net
He has obviously not explored into uBO and uMatrix and is stuck with ABP.
Well... CAs are not necessarily trustful OR independent.
The land of the free :)

Again the issue of date. The Snowden revelations didn't came to exist
back then.

Post by s***@anchev.net
and he suggest that the teaching should be about asking "the
question". But the problem with this is that he also seems to teach
what the answer is which deprives the questioner of the possibility to
look freely for oneself and to find a different one. He suggests
existing formulas like Diaspora etc. There is danger in suggesting
recipes because people easily stick to them and there is no real
question. So the question must come without an answer, otherwise it is
an imposition, not a free observation but a directed one.

I agree that we should not always give the definitive answer to
everyone. I don't know if the reference in [2] is aligned with what you
have just said, but in [2] we can see that this decision as to whether
the current "already-made answer" should be given depends on the age of
the person we're talking to.

[1]
<https://downloads.softwarefreedom.org/2017/conference/0-keynote.webm>. According to <https://softwarefreedom.org/events/2017/conference/video/>,
it's under CC BY-SA 3.0 US.

[2]
<https://media.libreplanet.org/u/libreplanet/m/the-free-software-movement-in-the-age-of-trump/>
(under CC BY-SA 4.0).

[s***@anchev.net]

the upload date was 2012-06-01

I didn't look at YouTube. I downloaded with avideo locally.
So blame the one who shares dated info and asks for feedback based on current
issues :)

BTW I see no links in your current and previous posts. I think it should be
better if you put them in the relevant place in text rather. Putting them at
the end makes it difficult to jump back and forth. After all - we are not
writing wikipedia here.

[Adonay Felipe Nogueira]

Post by s***@anchev.net
I didn't look at YouTube. I downloaded with avideo locally.
So blame the one who shares dated info and asks for feedback based on
current issues :)

Don't worry, this happens with everyone. ;)

I didn't have time to test this yet because I rarely use YouTube ---
except for getting stuff out as .webm and seeding it using torrent ---
since I'm trying to push back on the set of incumbents described by
Yochai (the person who gave the SFLC Fall 2017 Conference keynote that I
referenced in another message), but does avideo have `--write-info-json'
option? If "yes" then: you can get the upload date from the .info.json
file.

[s***@anchev.net]

Thanks for sharing the links. I will look at those materials when I have more
time.

As for avideo: the man page says it does have such option. FWIW I just saw
that the file it downloaded is with date from 2016, so I guess it takes care
of that.

[Adonay Felipe Nogueira]

saw that the file it downloaded is with date from 2016, so I guess it
takes care of that.

See the "description" field in the .info.json file, it's the field that
mostly appears in every attempt to download videos using avideo or
youtube-dl. There is a field which also tells the upload date, but it
rarely appears when writing the .info.json file in the first few
tries. From the "description" field one can see that the interview is
from 2012.

[Adonay Felipe Nogueira]

For those which reported missing references for the message I'm replying
to (my own one), here is the references. Now they should appear normally
for those reading using the forums.

[1] https://downloads.softwarefreedom.org/2017/conference/0-keynote.webm
. According to https://softwarefreedom.org/events/2017/conference/video/
, it's under CC BY-SA 3.0 US.

[2]
https://media.libreplanet.org/u/libreplanet/m/the-free-software-movement-in-the-age-of-trump/
(under CC BY-SA 4.0).

[s***@openmailbox.org]

There again you come with this "free software can't give you privacy" bs...
yeah you did a tcpdump and found some background chatting, which is not nice,
that's true.
Do the following:
1. download the source code of firefox
2. do a sed replace for every unwanted URL firefox is communicating with and
substitute it with "localhost"
3. compile firefox

=> you solved the problem for yourself

4. release your changes to the public

=> you solved the problem for everybody else

Free Software DOES give you control, and control enables you to get privacy.
Actually you proved it yourself but didn't realize it.

[s***@anchev.net]

Post by s***@openmailbox.org
There again you come with this "free software can't give you privacy" bs...

I have never said that. Before telling another he talks "bs" you should
understand what he says. What I have explained previously is that just
because a program is released as free software is not a guarantee that it
respects your privacy.
Right now or immediately?

Don't instruct me, please. If you want to do something - you can do it and
share the result with others. FWIW I have already looked at that option but
it is not that simple (sed replacement).

Post by s***@openmailbox.org
Free Software DOES give you control, and control enables you to get privacy.

Yes, if you have an extra 100 man years to inspect millions of lines of code
and a freeze of whole human history for that period of time. And that's the
whole point - that just because it is possible doesn't mean it is feasible.

[s***@openmailbox.org]

Post by s***@anchev.net
I have never said that.

You literally wrote:
"He seems to assume that free software gives him privacy which is rather
superficial considering the issues mentioned in this thread"

Post by s***@anchev.net
FWIW I have already looked at that option but it is not that simple (sed

replacement).

Why not?
The data is stored in the source code. What should you prevent from simply
replacing it?
Try the same thing with proprietary software...

[s***@anchev.net]

Ok. Maybe I should have been more explicit by saying "He seems to assume that
free software PER SE gives him privacy..."

Is that clear now?

Post by s***@openmailbox.org
Why not?

Try it and you will see. Don't advise about things which you have not tried.
1) Learn practically 2) Share, not 1) Criticize 2) Advise theoretically. I
may be wrong, you may be right. You may find something better. I am ok with
that. In fact - I would welcome it.

[s***@anchev.net]

https://yro.slashdot.org/story/18/01/17/2141212/facebook-is-a-living-breathing-crime-scene-says-former-tech-insider

[d***@fastmail.com]

If family black sheep had grades, mine would be obsidian.

Firstly, you can't convince your family what they do with their time online;
just like they can't control yours. Also, sometimes when you decide to stand
up for your ethics you have to endure some negative outcomes. I am often the
person people turn to when they need help with their computers, I refuse to
help people with social media problems. I simply tell them that they have
already fucked their privacy and they are beyond help; they can figure out
how to reset their password on their own. This is not a popular stand with
people in my life, I don't really care about being popular thankfully. I just
lack that bone in my brain.

Yes, sometimes they say mean things to me. I just walk away from them and
stop talking to them for awhile. When we interact again I tell them what they
said to me was hurtful and disrespectful; then I drop it. I do not expect and
apology.

I haven't used consumer social media for some time now and even when I did
have it I was very conservative about it (no pics, everything on my profile
was a lie, primarily just sent direct messages). Sometimes family members
will force a picture thing, it happens. I don't have these big debates about
it, instead I simply refuse to take a good picture. I never smile or look
like I am happy in a cell phone picture because I am not. I have gotten
really good at looking away or down at the ground at the moment the pic
happens. I am the master of the impromptu sneeze. After awhile people stopped
asking me to take pictures with them because I kept ruining them. I also
offer to take pictures with other peoples phone, you can't be in a picture
you took.

The big thing to do is to delete your own accounts if you have not already
done so. I found once people no longer had the option to "tag" me in things
their desire to include me in their stalkerbook exploits dropped
precipitously.

[Caleb Herbert]

Post by d***@fastmail.com
If family black sheep had grades, mine would be obsidian.
I simply tell them that they have
already fucked their privacy and they are beyond help; they can figure out
how to reset their password on their own.

I don't do it that harshly. I simply tell the truth: "I haven't used
that in a long time. I have no clue how it works, and I don't use
proprietary software, so I'm not going to figure it out.

[k***@yahoo.com]

Too many people have "nothing to hide". I find it very hard to argue with
them.

[g***@riseup.net]

Actually they got it wrong. They have **nowhere** to hide, not 'nothing'.

Allow me share some food for your brain


It's not a good feeling when you get up every morning knowing that your own
government is tracking you. They told me later 'we knew when you got up, we
knew when you left your house, we knew which vehicles you used, where you
stopped, where you shopped', for every electronic communication was being
monitored, on a 24/7 bases, including my phone.

Where do you go in that regime? Where do you go? Where do you go? Where is a
safe place? Where do you go to be yourself?

Thomas Andrews Drake

If you think you are innocent, or that you have nothing to hide, you do not
understand what is happening. Justice, like truth, in this system is not
relevant. Ask Chelsea Manning, Julian Assange or Edward Snowden, along with
whistle-blowers like Thomas Drake, where justice and truth got them.

Chris Hedges


----------------------------------------------------------

Where is a safe place? Where do you go to be yourself?

^ This is the very definition of privacy. It has nothing to do wahtsoever
with 'hiding'.

[s***@anchev.net]

I find it not much different from the belief that there is an almighty entity
(God) watching from above your every move and thought an deciding where you
should go next.

The only difference - before it was an idea, now man has made it into a fact.
So man created the idea of god, then started worshiping that idea, now man is
trying to glorify himself through the realization of that sick idea.

The more I look at what is happening, the more I think: the only salvation is
some deep genetic mutation which would make human species into something
else. Otherwise we are simply finished.

[g***@riseup.net]

You touch a very important point indeed, joe. God is indeed almighty for
he/she (I prefer 'it) is omnipresent and omniscient.

Post by s***@anchev.net
The more I look at what is happening, the more I think: the only salvation

is some deep genetic mutation which would make human species into something
else.

Well, I retired into a cave, I have tons of cans and my laptop, I rarely see
the light of the day (only when my Internet connection goes down, doesn't
happen very often). The mutation has already started, a third is growing
(which is quite useful so I can sip on my soda while typing this ^^

[i***@posteo.net]

Pascal and I can agree to disagree; his wager[1] still works:

1.)If I genuinely believed that a supreme deity who was keeping a list and
checking it twice genuinely thought that I and everybody I cared about was
naughty every time we tried to be nice, I would want to kick that (expletive)
in the testicles.

2.)I don't like bitter, angry old people who hate the world any more than you
do.

Therefore: Oh look, a pretty butterfly.....

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager

[s***@anchev.net]

[k***@yahoo.com]

Post by g***@riseup.net
It's not a good feeling when you get up every morning knowing that your own

government is tracking you. They told me later 'we knew when you got up, we
knew when you left your house, we knew which vehicles you used, where you
stopped, where you shopped', for every electronic communication was being
monitored, on a 24/7 bases, including my phone.

Post by g***@riseup.net
Where do you go in that regime? Where do you go? Where do you go? Where is

a safe place? Where do you go to be yourself?

Those "nothing to hide" (or "nowhere to hide" as you say) people generally
have no or very little concern about their government tracking them.

Post by g***@riseup.net
If you think you are innocent, or that you have nothing to hide, you do not

understand what is happening. Justice, like truth, in this system is not
relevant. Ask Chelsea Manning, Julian Assange or Edward Snowden, along with
whistle-blowers like Thomas Drake, where justice and truth got them.

"whistle-blower" is the keyword. Not many people decide to disclose secret
information or do something else that bother their government, they don't
believe that things happened to Manning, Assange or Snowden can apply to
them, not to mention some of them have no respect for whistle-blowers.

[s***@anchev.net]

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/jan/23/never-get-high-on-your-own-supply-why-social-media-bosses-dont-use-social-media

[Mason Hock]

Excellent article. Thanks for sharing.

[g***@riseup.net]

“It’s possible that in 20 years we’ll look back at the current
generation of children and say: ‘Look, they are socially different from
every other generation of humans that came before and as a result this is a
huge problem and maybe we need to regulate these behaviours.’

The damage is already done, their behavior is radically different from my
generation's behavior and it doesn't take a genius to understand so. Have you
been on a train lately or a bus or any of those places where kids get to be
together? They could not be more alienated and separated from any reality
than they currently are. It's disgusting, a shame.
Noam Chomsky once said: 'You have to pose on people what's called a
"philosophy of futility". You have to focus them on the insignificant things
of life, like fashionable consumption. And it makes perfect sense. The ideal
is to have individuals who are totally disassociated from one another, whose
conception of themselves, the sense of value is just "how many created wants
can I satisfy?'

[Mason Hock]

There's one positive shred in that article.

"a growing number of coders and designers are quitting their jobs in disillusionment at what their work entails"

It's nice to hear that some individuals in Silicon Valley have a conscience. Unfortunately, quitting now might be too little too late.

[p***@laposte.net]

Dear Akito

Don't tell your family that using facebook is bad.
It is not bad to share picture with other persons.

Just tell them that when a company like facebook is getting so bigger and
lets no place for other social medias like diaspora* or gnu social (you can
add the example of google), this is no longer a real liberal state.

Your family certainely compares food trades, TV channels, smartphone,
clothes...
Why the f*** not be able to compare another social media ? Or another search
engine ?

Maybe other social medias can offer them features they don't have on facebook
(and of course privacy).

People will thing they will downgrade by using such social media like
diaspora*.

Facebook is free, and always will : so you are the product.

Diaspora* asks people to contribute to it wheras Facebool don't !
https://diasporafoundation.org/get_involved
People are asked to build their OWN social media !
The more people will use it, the more it will progress.
And when it's really builded by the people, it belongs to the people. Not to
some shareholders. And you are sure it is fitted for you, because you
contributed to it.

The real price of Facebook is around 5€ per mount (I live in europe).

Voilà !

[Mason Hock]

Post by p***@laposte.net
Don't tell your family that using facebook is bad.
It is not bad to share picture with other persons.
Just tell them that when a company like facebook is getting so bigger and
lets no place for other social medias like diaspora* or gnu social (you can
add the example of google), this is no longer a real liberal state.

I think you understate the problem. This is about more than market share. It's about mind control and surveillance. Using Facebook *is* bad, as in using it you subject yourself to psychological harm. Sharing pictures *is* bad when you are contributing them to a massive facial recognition database.

[p***@laposte.net]

Mason,

You are preaching a conviced person.

The market share is also important and have to be noticed.

I live in a country where 51% of the people are on Facebook ! Even after
Snowden revelations. And nothing have changed ! It is even worst !

A lot of people don't give a f*** about recognision database by private
companies because of terrorism.
So, as people are always so intrested by the money, I talk about money.

I prefer relying the time people spend on Facebook and the time they can
spend by earning money in exchange of a service as an employee.
Facebook is intresting for them because everyone's on it ! And spend precious
time to make it "intresting" (or sort of when you read the average message
you find on Facebook who are mostly stupid).
They create content !

But is this content creation is making a better world with less chemicals in
food, or a fair-play economy ? No way !
Marketing by big companies and mass surveillance walks together on facebook.
This a fact !

[s***@anchev.net]

Post by p***@laposte.net
Facebook is free, and always will

Free as in price doesn't mean freedom. The price we pay for using free things
has turned out to be much higher than actually paying with money. Currently
we pay for cable TV and 95% of the programs show commercials. Why? I don't
want to watch commercials. I have paid, I have supported all those channels.
Still they get the money and still they exploit my time. 2 hours movie comes
with 30-40 minutes of ads. Every 20 minutes there is a 10min break for ads.

Same with Facebook: ads, tracking, etc.

[p***@laposte.net]

heyjoe,

I haven't ever meant that something free meant freedom.
I've well understood the term "Free software". I speak french, I still use
"Libre".

You quote me but edited the sentence.

When I say "you are the product" it means that by being on Facebook, you are
bringing FOR FREE contents to make Facebook attractive.
But you are not involved in the Facebook developement.
The content of Facebook, or the life of a lot of people is Facebook fortune !

If you pay the cable, you pay the cable company that gives you TV channels.
If you pay a TV channel, you're not excepted to have any ads. But this
channel is only for the ones who have paid. The are examples. It is simple.
But if your newspapers have ads, this is not a true independant newspapers.
And they will not tell you anything wrong about their announcers.

[s***@vmail.me]

Hey guys, so we had a celebration last night and they said they want a family
picture but they will not upload when it includes me. Now this morning I am
very surprised that the person who said that will not upload the pictures (my
photo) uploaded it.
I am on a brink of destruction right now.!

[s***@anchev.net]

There are surveillance cameras even when you walk outdoors or drive your car.
There are also satellites which take pictures from above all the time and
send it to the governments. Is the solution to hide?

Modifying one's behavior because of all that will not change anything, it
will even make things worse. Even Snowden said that. That is the whole idea
of the panopticon - to feel controlled all the time and fear that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon

Remember also that extreme avoidance of what the crowd does creates a much
stronger fingerprint of yourself. Not that I am suggesting that you give in
but be aware of all that. Running away has never sold any human problems, it
has always made them worse. We need something much bigger and much more
radical than simply not using this or that website.

[s***@vmail.me]

I have not read the idea of panopticon. Are you suggesting to hide in plain
sight idea? So I convinced them to remove some of my pictures but they did
not remove it entirely it still shows my face and facebook's facial
recognition is what I or everyone should fear.

[s***@anchev.net]

Post by s***@vmail.me
I have not read the idea of panopticon.

Do it.

Post by s***@vmail.me
Are you suggesting to hide in plain sight idea?

I am not suggesting anything along the lines of "do this" or "don't do that".
It is important to see things for oneself and from that comes clarity and
right action.

Post by s***@vmail.me
So I convinced them to remove some of my pictures but they did not remove

it entirely it still shows my face and facebook's facial recognition is what
I or everyone should fear.

You cannot remove anything from Facebook. It is never deleted, even after the
account is deactivated. It will stay on FB's servers and be used for all
kinds of things like facial recognition, machine learning etc.

[s***@vmail.me]

Post by s***@anchev.net
You cannot remove anything from Facebook. It is never deleted, even after

the account is deactivated. It will stay on FB's servers and be used for all
kinds of things like facial recognition, machine learning etc.
I agree

[Mason Hock]

Post by s***@anchev.net
You cannot remove anything from Facebook. It is never deleted, even after
the account is deactivated. It will stay on FB's servers and be used for all
kinds of things like facial recognition, machine learning etc.

When I finally smartened up and deleted my account Facebook claimed that my data would be deleted from their servers in 14 days. I'm certain this was a lie.

[s***@anchev.net]

Yesterday I watched a recent video by Lunduke. He explained that he
deactivated his account long ago, asked several times for confirmation that
everything was deleted and received only replies from some people forwarding
him to other people. In the end he was told that this cannot be confirmed.
Many months later he created a brand new account with the same email address
as before which was obviously possible as if this email address was never
used before. And surprise: upon first login all his old data was there.
Additionally there were 2 new fresh friend requests pending (which had
arrived during the time while the account was supposedly completely inactive
an invisible).

Personally I am still thinking how to properly get out of FB. I still have
some people there who insist to remain stupid and to communicate only through
FB. They would never check their emails any more. That's why I say - removing
one person doesn't change anything. It is not that simple. Same with Gmail,
Youtube and what not.

[g***@riseup.net]

Post by s***@anchev.net
old data was there

Which reminds of Binney when he says that metadata dousn't need that much
space, even the metadata of the entire world, to get stored. Why do you think
they keep building more and more of these monsters? Their motto is 'collect
it ALL, so we can know it ALL'. I bet my ass all data is perpetually stored,
for ever. God, after all, needs to know everything, even the most
insignificant details. Nothing is really insignificant btw.


**monsters

[Mason Hock]

Post by s***@anchev.net
He explained that he
deactivated his account

Both deletion (no more account) and deactivation (the account sits waiting for you to come back) are available, but Facebook goes out of their way to lead people to deactivate rather than delete. I could not even find the deletion option in Facebook's settings. I had to get there from an external link in a support thread. In addition to making it hard to learn of the deletion option, they are vague about the details of the deactivation option. It's clear that they don't want you to delete your account. I wonder if there is some legal reason they have to have it as an option at all.

Post by s***@anchev.net
Personally I am still thinking how to properly get out of FB. I still have
some people there who insist to remain stupid and to communicate only
through FB. They would never check their emails any more.

Shortly before I deleted my account entirely, my only usage of Facebook was to log in once a week and respond to the messages sent to me through Facebook even though I had told friends that it was not my preferred mode of communication. It turned out to be quite easy to get them to stop. I deleted my account, and they were forced to contact me by email or text (received by me via XMPP). That would not have worked if they had instead reacted by never contacting me at all. Fortunately they are better friends than that. Everyone's situation is different, though, and Facebook has a lot of power, so just deleting the account might not be an option for everyone.

Post by s***@anchev.net
Same
with Gmail, Youtube and what not.

Gmail was a little easier to get away from. My old Gmail address forwards everything to my new one, and I respond via the new one. Gmail will see these incoming messages until people gradually learn my new email address, but does not see my responses or the rest of the conversation... unless of course the other person uses Gmail in which case it doesn't matter, but its better than a situation like Facebook where we can't even communicate without using the same platform.

YouTube, for me at least, has been the trickiest to avoid. Before I came to my senses, I let myself come to rely on YouTube to access music, which is particularly bad because I'm a musician. I now avoid youtube.com and only access YouTube through avideo and youtube-viewer, but those don't work on videos with DRM (the number of which seems to be increasing) and does not solve the larger problem of my depending on Google to access information.

[s***@anchev.net]

Post by Mason Hock
unless of course the other person uses Gmail in which case it doesn't

matter

That is the actual case I am talking about. You may have the perfect free,
clean hardware and software, not use any spying services etc. but you have to
communicate with others and others are inside a corrupt system. One person or
10k people is nothing. Isolation solves nothing.

[i***@posteo.net]

But you can still have your email program filter out all @gmail addresses,
send them to a special folder, and decide whether to reply by landline
telephone, postage stamp, or passenger pigeon instead of email.

Of course that won't work for your employer or your ex-wife, but why feed the
mafia if you don't have to?

If you have already explained why friends don't let friends use gmail and the
person isn't listening, is that really someone you want in your life?

Maybe they weren't really serious about keeping in touch with you in the
first place.

[s***@anchev.net]

send them to a special folder, and decide whether to reply by landline
telephone, postage stamp, or passenger pigeon instead of email.

I don't know how you will filter GSuite email addresses with custom domain
names but even if we suppose it is technically possible, the person on the
other side of the wire will still expect an email reply, not a pigeon.
Landline phones are also eavesdropped, regular mail can also be unsafe, your
pigeon can be caught etc.

why feed the mafia if you don't have to?

The right question is: how do you communicate with people who like to do it.
Will you isolate yourself or will you give in? Or something else?

If you have already explained why friends don't let friends use gmail and

the person isn't listening, is that really someone you want in your life?

Are you suggesting that one should remove people from one's life because they
use Gmail or Facebook? What if those people are your family? Do you want them
out of your life because they don't conform to your *idea* about *serious*
life?

And again: if you don't use Gmail but say - another service, non PRISM. There
is no service provider which will guarantee you that their computers don't
have Intel ME, that they run only libreboot, and that there is no proprietary
firmware on any chip. Such computer simply doesn't exist. Nobody can give you
that service.

So what will you do?

[Adonay Felipe Nogueira]

I would remove their contact resources/forms/ways that are not
*federated* (this is a little beyond free/libre software as a product,
and is very important, see: [1], it belongs to a subset of the
free/libre software as philosophy).

Email is, at least by design, federated, so you don't need to remove
their emails.

Besides, it's possible to do such split by sender address. Email clients
which support "splitting" and "scoring" allow you to do this. For
example, Gnus, the email and news client that comes installed with GNU
Emacs by default. I don't particularly use it because I don't receive
emails from the "big players" that frequently, at least not directly,
just through discussion/mailing lists.

[1] https://libreplanet.org/wiki/XMPP#Why_should_you_use_it.3F .

Post by s***@anchev.net
I don't know how you will filter GSuite email addresses with custom
domain names but even if we suppose it is technically possible, the
person on the other side of the wire will still expect an email reply,
not a pigeon. Landline phones are also eavesdropped, regular mail can
also be unsafe, your pigeon can be caught etc.
The right question is: how do you communicate with people who like to
do it. Will you isolate yourself or will you give in? Or something
else?
Are you suggesting that one should remove people from one's life
because they use Gmail or Facebook? What if those people are your
family? Do you want them out of your life because they don't conform
to your *idea* about *serious* life?
And again: if you don't use Gmail but say - another service, non
PRISM. There is no service provider which will guarantee you that
their computers don't have Intel ME, that they run only libreboot, and
that there is no proprietary firmware on any chip. Such computer
simply doesn't exist. Nobody can give you that service.
So what will you do?

--
- https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno
- Palestrante e consultor sobre /software/ livre (não confundir com
gratis).
- "WhatsApp"? Ele não é livre. Por favor, veja formas de se comunicar
instantaneamente comigo no endereço abaixo.
- Contato: https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno#vCard
- Arquivos comuns aceitos (apenas sem DRM): Corel Draw, Microsoft
Office, MP3, MP4, WMA, WMV.
- Arquivos comuns aceitos e enviados: CSV, GNU Dia, GNU Emacs Org, GNU
GIMP, Inkscape SVG, JPG, LibreOffice (padrão ODF), OGG, OPUS, PDF
(apenas sem DRM), PNG, TXT, WEBM.

[s***@anchev.net]

And that removes Intel ME and proprietary firmware? Or Spectre?

You see - you are still thinking in terms of *I* and *me* although I
explained that on the other side of the wire there are millions affected by
those systems. It is beyond your resources, beyond your little libre system.
I don't know if you really understand the depth of the whole issue.

[l***@dcc.ufmg.br]

Why should you have the right to decide what "the other side of the wire"
(the person you are communicating with or the server you interact with) runs?
You are their "other side of wire" too!

[s***@anchev.net]

I am not enforcing rights on anyone. I am just pointing out the fact that on
the other side of the wire there is a compromised system which cannot be
trusted and that by securing just one node in a network doesn't give security
of communication as long as the other nodes are not secure.

[γραφω λογον]

On 01/30/2018 01:45 AM, Heyjoe wrote a post that was apparently directed
towards myself, the owner of the "Heather" account on the Trisquel
Community peer-support forums, but I'm probably going to answer very
imperfectly and over time so here goes:


You said:

I don't know how you will filter GSuite email addresses with custom
domain names


So I probably shouldn't say that I don't either, but will you tell me
how when you figure it out?

Unfortunately, I have a problem with saying things like that. I'll work
on it.

You said: Landline phones are also eavesdropped, regular mail can
also be unsafe, your pigeon can be caught etc.

So I said: Yeppers. I think they call that "history". Obviously you
don't need a condescending tutorial from a random stranger on the
internet, which is a huge relief because there's a zillion things I'd
rather do today than THAT again.

I said: why feed the mafia if you don't have to?

So you said: The right question is:

But I don't want to derail akito's thread by saying what I think of
(expletive deleted) suits and ties who want to "volunteer somewhere they
can help the poor" and don't even know that Horatio Alger wrote fiction
and think they have the right to tell me what I'm supposed to think and
feel just because I cared more about the fate of the human race than
wearing a suit and tie to work when I was in college.

You can thank my mates, Supertramp and Mason, for that, not our
moderator, David, who has better things to do with his time than issue
me "warning points" and temporary three day bans, capiche? This isn't
facebook, dude, it's a peer support forum for the Trisquel operating
system.[1]

You said: how do you communicate with people who like to do
it. Will you isolate yourself[2] or will you give in? Or something else?

So I said: Oh, something else, but I'm sure ymmv and other folks here
who make up the collective "we" of the Trisquel boards will be along
shortly with more helpful and relevant answers to your rhetorical question.

I already said: If you have already explained why friends don't let
friends use gmail
and the person isn't listening, is that really someone you want in your
life?

So you said: Are you suggesting that one should remove people from one's
life because
they use Gmail or Facebook? What if those people are your family? Do you
want them out of your life because they don't conform to your *idea*
about *serious* life?

So I laughed so hard at myself you wouldn't believe it even if it wasn't
true and felt so grateful for my mates here on the Trisquel community
peer support forums, because this is EXACTLY what Supertramp and Mason
meant when they refused to accept my well-intentioned apology for being
such an idiot sheeple with all the tmi that's still in the Troll Lounge
and expressed their own fears that the owner of the "Heather" account
might actually be more like a canary in a coal mine.

Did you read the old thread that inspired akito to make the original
post on this thread? I'm just curious, because I sure did leave a lot of
bruises to kick on it, didn't I?

Seriously, Joe, no hard feelings about any of this and I'm not even
angry at you, just trying to answer your questions honestly and publicly.

You said: Such computer simply doesn't exist. Nobody can give you that
service.

So I said: But you are speaking to me in front of people who wish that
they could. I am very protective of them right now and some of them are
very tired from coding an emergency patch for the Spectre/Meltdown
vulnerabilities. Please try to remember that when you address me
specifically or other experienced users on tech forums who do not
actively write software, documentation, or have other normal(ish)
volunteer(ish) part-time job(ish)s.

Nobody can fire me, personally, from the desk job I don't have, take
away property I don't have, or hurt the wife I don't have if I get rid
of my computer and spend that time trying to grow petunias instead.
Please remember that this is not true for people who I, the owner of the
"Heather" account, care about.

You said: So what will you do?

So I said: The same thing people have always done in similar
circumstances. Most likely no better or no worse than anybody else.

If my family and country abandon me and everybody in my afk world tells
me that I'm less than a cockroach, I am going to love and protect my
developers and fellow free software users because they would be all I
had left. This is not something a Windows user should reasonably be
expected to understand.

I'm putting the footnotes in The Troll Lounge, Joe, since that's where
they belong. I'll edit on the forum when this posts so I can link you.

How are we doing so far?

[s***@anchev.net]

So I probably shouldn't say that I don't either, but will you tell me how

when you figure it out?

I think it should be possible to create filter based on mail headers (which
contain info about the sending server, i.e. you can identify if it is Gmail).

How are we doing so far?

One of us seems too excited about the presence of the other. :)

[g***@riseup.net]

Post by Mason Hock
I could not even find the deletion option in Facebook's settings. I had to

get there from an external link in a support thread.

the very excellent privacytools.io website gives two links (which I post so
akito can sneak on his memberz_fams backdoored computers and secretely
"delete" ("delete") their accounts ->

https://www.facebook.com/help/delete_account
http://deletefacebook.com/

Post by Mason Hock
It's clear that they don't want you to delete your account. I wonder if

there is some legal reason they have to have it as an option at all.


I guess they prefer to sift all your data legally. I guess once you delete
your account they have to sift it illegally. I guess they feel more
comfortable knowing they are doing illegal stuff legally, just like their NSA
colleagues.


Now, I'll take example from Adfeno the boss and pretend I am posting this
through the mailing lisztdts so I can leave some nice addendum in a very
casual and random manner..

--
- Encrypt it All so they can Know Shit
- free is not gratis, it's better
- "WhatsApp"? The coppers use it daily, Need I say more?
- Once any bit or byte leaves your computer and enters teh Internet you
should assume it will always be everywhere, forever. Your assumption will
prove itself true, give it time.
- contact me: don't
- If you think data brokers will just hand you legal tools to actually
protect or amend you present, past or future privacy, you need to be checked.

[s***@anchev.net]

Thanks for the links.

[g***@riseup.net]

always welcome, mate Joe!

[γραφω λογον]

Of course, but we all did it anyway. I had to rat out one of my own kids
with the facial recognition software because mine had been "temporarily
disabled" for so long that I didn't have a clue who any of the other
"friends" they wanted me to identify even were.

Mason, you write from a deeper place than what can be exploited for
money. Keep up the good work--you are so much more than a "suit and tie".

[Mason Hock]

Post by s***@anchev.net
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon

Perfect analogy.

[g***@riseup.net]

/me hands the solution for family member outrageous privacy disrespect to
akito


**solution (use it wisely)

[i***@posteo.net]

Yep.

And let's not forget prevention of family members, as imperfect as our
current technology may be.

/Heather of the Trisquel Boards

[p***@laposte.net]

https://cvdazzle.com/

A solution for everyday ?

[s***@anchev.net]

I don't think it is very sane to turn oneself into a clown or damage one's
vision with deliberate obstructions. This won't remove mass surveillance.
Remember that when you send an email the chance that on the other side of the
wire there is a PRISMed system (Gmail, Yahoo etc) is huge.

Did you know they are developing drones which are as big as a fly and can't
be distinguished? The other day it was on NatGeo. There are working
prototypes.

[p***@laposte.net]

Well, I don't think mass surveillance is a joke.

This article is actually quite serious and face recognison is used
everywhere, even in the steets. Not only on Facebook.

I'm an funny person.
Making a surprise to the family and friends who are using a lot Facebook for
trying this method can allow him to create a real event in a party for fun.
He can create his own mask. Try some others. He can be the king of the party
!
If it's really working, he can enjoy the party and not be afraid to be
pictured.
Why not have a try ?

I've been pictured on Facebook twice recently. But this was within the
context of my associative participations who are public. This is not my
private life.
I only regret I have to do this for people to come because a lot of persons
follows us on Facebook.

Being pictured in private is something more problematic.

Concerning our friend Akito, I think this is more a family/friend problem
where I shouldn't interfere, but I have confidence in him to think and to
react as a responsible adult by choosing the better solution for him and his
family/friends concerning his presence on Facebook.

Again, making a parallel between working time and facebook time is a much
more effctive argument to people for giving up Facebook.

[s***@anchev.net]

Post by p***@laposte.net
Why not have a try ?

Because it is stupid and futile.

You see - all this pattern of thinking about the ultimate entertainment,
security through isolation, being a king etc. is the root of the problems we
are facing. Yet man thinks he can escape from all this with more
entertainment and stronger control over non-entertainment. It is impossible.

[p***@laposte.net]

The only stupidity is not taking advantage of what people can imagine to face
something : face recognition for this example.

Akito has been pictured during a party and this picture have been posted on
Facebook without his conscent. Right ?
It could have been anyone. I'm not someone special to give him advices for
his own life.
Having a real trouble with his family is awful. I know this situation.

It would not cause any problem for me because I'm a funny person and I have
self derision.
And it would not be a problem for anyone who is taking pictures because it
can be sort of a game with digital cameras with face recognition options.
People are always talking about the party when it's over. And maybe they can
think about face recognition with digital cameras and applications.
A party is made to be enjoyed. Not to talk about serious things.
Spoiling it by hammering arguments against my family and friends is
unproductive.

[Mason Hock]

Post by s***@anchev.net
Because it is stupid and futile.

Yes, we should not have to give up our dignity to void being surveilled, and I'm not convinced it would work anyway.

[i***@posteo.net]

I don't know if it is a solution for every day, but since Akito is a minor I
would definitely want him to use this or a mardi gras mask if he were a
family member or someone else I cared about enough to want try to protect.

It has seriously gotten so bad that minors are routinely photographed at
public events without their own or their parents' permission and then told
(not asked) that the video of the cute/talented kid has been uploaded to the
stranger's Facebook or YouTube accounts.

How does Akito know that his picture won't be turned into a meme and
ridiculed? I know mine probably has because of facial deformities
and...well....suffice it to say
https://www.streetsensemedia.org/article/dental-medicaid-mary-otto-teeth-book-deamonte-driver/
and bla bla bla everybody's got problems.

Things are not normal. The adults in Akito's life should be protecting him,
not something he needs to protect himself from.

Akito, I regret my overly cheerful and optimistic posts in the old thread
that youread. I wish I had answers for you.

I am currently estranged from former self-taught hacker father,
Griselda-Beatriz, and another daughter who does not have silly "internet
euphemism name".

"Clown" and "Too stupid to figure out how to bat at pictures" are masks
iIfrequently wear in offline life as well as "too irresponsible to be trusted
with yet another cell phone" and "never has been good for anything but
spending (survivor against all odds of chemical addiction during kids' entire
childhood and therefore unable to pay child support so i never actually had
any access to my) ex-husband's money".

I had some words of courage for you cherry picked from various works of
English literature but they are on my other computer and there are only 24
hours in a day and less than five more years in my own statistically probable
life expectancy. If you don't enjoy English literature, I'm sure there are
equally worthy works in your own language.

You are very brave.

[s***@vmail.me]

I tried to install diaspora but the server which is a ra*berry pi (it is n ot
open hardware i asked in the forums and they CAN NOT release the gpu code,
and they say it does not have backdoors but who will believe that,

eoma68 is too much expensive that I cannot buy locally) not being able to
handle it (low ram) so I just installed humhub community edition, but
disasppointed to not find any mobile apps and I saw a discussion that the
offcial mobile app will not be free.

I tried gnu social but I need something that almost mimics book of faces,
friendica cannot be installed for some reason and no other alternatives that
I can think of. Thank you for suggesting the deleting their accounts
@SuperTramp but that would just spark world war, they did not remove my face
in the post and I am still pissed of because of that, in the next family
gathering I will refuse to take any pictures whatever be the consequences of
it.

[Adonay Felipe Nogueira]

You can get your copy of GNU Social to be like Facecrap, most
importantly change the character limit to something equal or greater
than 500.

Also you don't need the Raspberry stuff if you are going for a simple
home server, various free/libre system distribution projects use Beagle
Bone Black and other which at least initialize completely with
free/libre software for this stuff, specially because serving a GNU
Social instance doesn't require GPU.

For more information you can also see [1] and [2].

RPi crap is not an option unfortunatelly. :S

Addendum: Thanks for those responsible for Raspberry Pi (and future
versions) for making this thing so difficult for us.

[1] <https://www.fsf.org/resources/hw/single-board-computers>.

[2] <https://wiki.parabola.nu/ARM_Installation_Guide>.

Post by s***@vmail.me
I tried to install diaspora but the server which is a ra*berry pi (it
is n ot open hardware i asked in the forums and they CAN NOT release
the gpu code, and they say it does not have backdoors but who will
believe that,
eoma68 is too much expensive that I cannot buy locally) not being able
to handle it (low ram) so I just installed humhub community edition,
but disasppointed to not find any mobile apps and I saw a discussion
that the offcial mobile app will not be free.
I tried gnu social but I need something that almost mimics book of
faces, friendica cannot be installed for some reason and no other
alternatives that I can think of. Thank you for suggesting the
war, they did not remove my face in the post and I am still pissed of
because of that, in the next family gathering I will refuse to take
any pictures whatever be the consequences of it.

--
- https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno
- Palestrante e consultor sobre /software/ livre (não confundir com
gratis).
- "WhatsApp"? Ele não é livre. Por favor, veja formas de se comunicar
instantaneamente comigo no endereço abaixo.
- Contato: https://libreplanet.org/wiki/User:Adfeno#vCard
- Arquivos comuns aceitos (apenas sem DRM): Corel Draw, Microsoft
Office, MP3, MP4, WMA, WMV.
- Arquivos comuns aceitos e enviados: CSV, GNU Dia, GNU Emacs Org, GNU
GIMP, Inkscape SVG, JPG, LibreOffice (padrão ODF), OGG, OPUS, PDF
(apenas sem DRM), PNG, TXT, WEBM.