And Docker initially used Ubuntu. They explicitly and specifically switched to Alpine in 2016 for performance, to minimise the overhead.

Note: this comment is long, because it is important and the idea that “systemd is always better, no matter the situation” is absolutely dangerous for the entire FOSS ecosystem: both diversity and rationality are essential.

Systemd can get more efficient than running hundreds of poorly integrated scripts

In theory yes. In practice, systemd is a huge monolithic single-point-of-failure system, with several bottlenecks and reinventing-the-wheel galore. And openrc is a far cry from “hundreds of poorly integrated scripts”.

I think it is crucial we stop having dogmatic “arguments” with argumentum ad populum or arguments of authority, or we will end up recreating a Microsoft-like environment in free software.

Let’s stop trying to shoehorn popular solutions into ill suited use cases, just because they are used elsewhere with different limitations.

Systemd might make sense for most people on desktop targets (CPUs with several cores, and several GB of RAM), because convenience and comfort (which systemd excels at, let’s be honest) but as we approach “embedded” targets, simpler and smaller is always better.

And no matter how much optimisation you cram into the bigger software, it will just not perform like the simpler software, especially with limited resources.

Now, I take OpenRC as an example here, because it is AFAIR the default in devuan, but it also supports runit, sinit, s6 and shepherd.

And using s6, you just can’t say “systemd is flat out better in all cases”, that would be simply stupid.

Devuan + xfce.

Seeing that I’m a senior dev, take it any way you want.

Junior dev:

Straight out of uni, know the latest developments while having also studied long established standards and specifications (like POSIX, LSB, SQL, etc), full of energy, and ready to speedrun burning out any %

Senior dev:

Hasn’t learned anything substantial in decades, uses outdated specs because “who got the time for that, and legacy stuff works just as well anyway”, copy pastes most of their work from stack overflow, is only still employed because of their inside information knowledge and the utter absence of documentation leading to a bus factor of one, and has perfected the art of gaming the system to the point of photoshopping a sloppy IDE screen over their WoW game whenever a picture of them “working” gets taken.

Yeah, checks out.

Notable flatulists: two Brits and a French. I dunno you, but they seem full of shit.

https://simplex.chat/blog/20240314-simplex-chat-v5-6-quantum-resistance-signal-double-ratchet-algorithm.html

¹ Repudiation in SimpleX Chat will include client-server protocol from v5.7 or v5.8. Currently it is implemented but not enabled yet, as its support requires releasing the relay protocol that breaks backward compatibility.

² Post-quantum cryptography is available in beta version, as opt-in only for direct conversations. See below how it will be rolled-out further.

Some columns are marked with a yellow checkmark:

• when messages are padded, but not to a fixed size.
• when repudiation does not include client-server connection. In case of Cwtch it appears that the presence of cryptographic signatures compromises repudiation (deniability), but it needs to be clarified.
• when 2-factor key exchange is optional (via security code verification).
• when post-quantum cryptography is only added to the initial key agreement and does not protect break-in recovery.

Larger might be acceptable too, not sure

It should.

Also, work off of the copy. Never touch the source.

A then C. If you know how to do it^[1] ofc. If you don’t, then assume it is. Very different situation if the weapon is loaded. Both require C, but one much more intensely than the other.

Usually that’s about when I strace the process before running it through gdb…

But hopefully I can delay and minimise it a bit, open a better channel of communication with a few friends and relatives and perhaps raise some awareness in the process.

Absolutely.

This isn’t about you. Your data is key in making other, relevant people stand out. Why relevant? Because they resist. Because they aren’t depressed, they are fighting back. And whatever the reason that drives them, they can be manipulated. By compromising their anonymity. By making literally everyone else a “known variable”. With your help.

I too, like OP, thought I found the grail when I got my kids. People suddenly accepted using my communication preferences. Only to find years later that they didn’t. They didn’t care, understand, or respected my wishes. Don’t fool yourself: some people do care, but that is 10% tops.

This really is the best way. Once there’s a REASON for extra security, people understand and want to learn more.

No one cares. Nobody around you understands the security, the need for it, and the requirements. They will pretend, to see your kid. And then immediately and completely stop caring. It works for making people adopt your favourite messenger, yes. But nothing else.

I have two kids. I asked people to use signal to send and receive the photos. Asking people to follow your requirements only works for the direct immediate communication. The photos of my kids were sent by the recipients I sent them to (over signal) to other members of the family, over gmail (unencrypted), WhatsApp, Instagram, etc. I learned that years after.

This was in direct violation of my express requests. When I confronted them, they played dumb.

So, not to be a buzzkill here OP, but if you did this to get more people to use your messenger of choice, good job, it worked. If you did this so the pics of your kids stayed on safe apps, don’t fool yourself. They didn’t.

Love how nuanced this is 🙃

Better lzma performance with xz. 🤪

I found it here.

Here is the (IMHO) relevant part (emphasis mine):

If you use the App with an account hosted on a third-party server, then there are only a few cases where FUTO may learn any information at all about your use of the App.

• If you have the App configured to use Google push notifications, then FUTO’s push notification gateway will be involved in delivering push notifications from Google to your device. Push notifications include information on the Matrix event that generated the push, including: the human-readable name and Matrix user identifier for the user who sent the event and the Matrix room identifier for the room containing the event. Users who desire a greater level of privacy can configure the App to use UnifiedPush instead of Google Cloud Messaging. When a user on a third-party server receives a UnifiedPush notification through their third-party push server, FUTO does not see the notification or learn anything about it.

• If you obtained the App from the Google Play Store, and the App crashes, then we will receive a Firebase crash report.

• If you sign up for our mailing list in the app, then we learn your email address.

The notification should be UnifiedPush by default, and crash debug reports should be opt-in, not automatically sent out to the dev via Google… (I don’t think it is even possible to opt out)

And then the next days, news were all about teens who committed suicide (or failed to, ending up as vegetables) in a similar fashion.

That was weird.