Linux is a branch of development of the old unix class of systems. Unix is not necessarily open and free. FOSS is what is classified as open and free software. Unix since its inception was deeply linked to specific industrial private interests, let’s not forget all this while we examine the use of linux by left minded activists. FOSS is nice and cool, but it is nearly 99.99% run on non-open and non-free hardware. A-political proposals of crowd-funding and diy construction attempts have led to ultra-expensive idealist solutions reserved for the very few and the eccentric affluent experimenters

Linux vs Windows is cool and trendy, is it? Really is it alone containing any political content? If there is such what is it? So let’s examine it from the base.

FOSS, People, as small teams or individuals “producing as much as they can and want” offering what they produced to be shared, used, and modified by anyone, or “as much as they need”. This is as much of a communist system of production and consumption as we have experienced in the entirety of modern history. No exchange what so ever, collective production according to ability and collective consumption according to need.

BUT we have corporations, some of them mega-corps, multinationals who nearly monopolize sectors of computing markets, creating R&D departments specifically to produce and offer open and free code (or conditionally free). Why? Firstly because other idiots will join their projects and offer further development (labor), contribute to their projects, for “free”, but they still retain the leadership and ownership of the project. Somehow, using their code, without asking why they were willing to offer it in the first place, it is cool to use it as long as we can say we are anti/against/ms-win free.

Like false class consciousness we have fan-boys of IBM, Google, Facebook, Oracle, Qt, HP, Intel, AMD, … products against MS.

Back when unix would only run on enterprise ultra-expensive large scale systems and expensive workstations (remember Dec, Sun, Sgi, … workstations that were priced similarly to 2 brand new fast sportscars each) and the PC market was restricted to MS or the alternative Apple crap, people tried and tried to port forms of unix into a PC. Some really gifted hacking experts were able to achieve such marvels, but it was so specific to hardware that the examples couldn’t be generalized and utilized massively.

Suddenly this genious Finn and his friends devised a kernel that could make most PC hardware available work and unix with a linux kernel could boot and run.

IBM saw eventually a way back into the PC market it lost by handing dos out to the subcontractors (MS), and saw an opportunity to take over and steer this “project” by promoting RedHat. After 2 decades of behind the scenes guidance since the projected outcome was successful in cornering the market, IBM appeared to have bought RH.

Are we all still anti-MS and pro-IBM,google,Oracle,FB,Intel/AMD?

The bait thrown to dumb fish was an automated desktop that looked and behaved just like the latest MS-win edition.

What is the resistance?

Linus Trovalds and a few others who sign the kernel today make 6figure salaries ALL paid by a handful of computing giants that by offering millions to the foundation control what it does. Traps like rust, telemetry, … and other “options” are shoved daily into the kernel to satisfy the paying clients’ demands and wishes.

And we, in the left are fans of a multimilioner’s “team” against a “trilioner’s” team. This is not football or cricket, or F1. This is your data in the hands of multinationals and their fellow customer/agencies. Don’t forget which welfare system maintains the hierarchy of those industries whether the market is rosy or gray. Do I need to spell out the connection?

Beware of multinationals bearing gifts.

Yes there are healthier alternatives requiring a little more work and study to employ, the quick and easy has a “cost” even when it is FOSS.

.

  • rostselmasch@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
    11·
    1 year ago

    It has the same possibility to serve data to others as the SMART function of your hard serve does, if you use it together with a monitoring system.This is telemetry. You still dont understand what telemetry is, dont you?

    This means the machine has the ability to serve data to others, to the network, and to the admin collecting it

    You can activate the function to collect specific data, which can be send to somewhere else, if you wanrt so. You decide what happens. I am getting mail reports about my OPNsense Firewall if something is not going well. This is also telemetry. Those drivers simply can give you the possibility to access data natively. You have a direct API and you can work with it. Its same for SMART. It is the same. Even the information the sensors on your computer are showing to you, are exposed through a driver. Look here. You have to load modules. This modules are getting data. Telemetry.

    And to answer what you wrote first:

    Telemetry is a way for machines to passively allow another to collect data. Any chance this can be exploited? Why have it if your intention is a sole user/admin of a single machine?

    Telemtry is away to collect data. Those “another” can probably be youself. So whats about lm_sensors, does the average user need the information how the voltage is? Answer it for yourself.

    And also not everyone is a sole user/admin of a single machine. Even as a developer I am depending on log files which can be collected, so this all is quite handy. You still dont have a point.

    With the complexities of a self regulated system as systemd such abilities can’t be controlled or audited by a user, but look at what most users of linux have.

    Dont switch the topic. Tell me what is bad about lm_sensors and SMART.

    For non-industrial use no telemetry is needed or should be allowed.

    dmesg not allowed anymore? Try “ip a” or “ifconfig”. Be ready to receive some collected data.

    But you pick up on a detail of what the original post is aiming to state to discredit it on a technicality that is meaningless.

    No. The claim that the Linux kernel is likely to send collected data to large companies is a huge accusation. This would have tremendous implications. Back then there was already an outcry with a Linux distribution because the internet connectivity was checked by a ping to 8.8.8.8. And now the Linux kernel is sending telemetry data to big companies? Do you understand what this would mean? And also rust. But the rust thing has alreary been pointes out by an other user.

    The point is DO NOT let your anti-windows rhetoric blind and confuse users that this is an easy and safe alternative that provides security, privacy, and other goodies, when 99% choose windows that is just as automated and “user friendly” as windows.

    Never used anti-windows rhetoric.

    You tell me if your average linux user (especially those using gnome and plasma) know where, how, and why to disable kernel modules. Whether those modules are optionally disabled, enabled, included in the kernel, or awaiting someone to trigger them. Look at forums and boards, people mess up their boot-loader or fstab and their ms-win reaction is to format the disk and reinstall something like ubuntu.

    Stop pretending that those modules are collecting and sending something. You clearly dont understand what you are talking about. This is not a problem, but you pretend to understand it and repeat it over and over again. Those modules are not doing something bad. If you dont like that data is collected, try to remove /var/log somehow. And also disable dmesg somehow.

    There is nothing wrong with being wrong and you can ask. But you are stating things as facts that are absolutely not true. You are absolutely stubborn (sorry, I have to say that) about telemetry. You don’t understand the difference between data that is sent to a company and data that is made available through an interface. Telemetry for you means that somehow data is collected and then sent to Microsoft. And because the module in Linux has the word “telemetry” in its name, it is the same for you. You also don’t understand that all monitoring programmes use telemetry, even htop. gkrellm has the possibility to connect externally, that is already telemetry that is sent.

    You are also wrong about rust. Supply chain attacks are indeed a problem. This applies to every programing language and there is only little you can do about. Who said, that the rust developer even use modules from random third party? Thats the point.

    You can say “Ok, I am wrong with that all, but my point about security still applies, because everything is complex and systemd etc”. But stop insist on things that are obviously wrong.