Thanks for the details.

Sounds solvable. Not simple, but sounds like they'll be able to solve it, unless they're trying not to.

Maybe new lists could be downloaded per-domain. If I view one page on a domain, I'll probably view others in the same session. And energy use, there are probably ways to make the plug-ins more efficient - in their own code and by improving the functionality the browser makes available.

For the privacy problem of ad-blockers needing access to all of every webpage you view, this could be fixed by plug-ins being reviewed and verified. Mozilla does something like this.

So, the postponed the disabling of Manifest V2, but can the problems faced by the ad-blocker projects be fixed with some extra time?

I.e. Is this an actual solution? I presume ad-blocking is a bit of a cat-and-mouse, so auto-update filter lists sound crucial for ad-blockers to function. If Chrome blocks that, then they're not allowing useful ad-blockers.

Ad-blockers are the canary in the coal mine of the open web.

I said the same thing tomorrow but the mods deleted it. They've picked their side.

The "robot holding a shotgun" was a plot device. We can't wrap our brains around billions of IoT devices self-organising, so he told that story through the representation of various characters.

That's the Terminator series of films to me. May there be many more!

Thanks for clarifying, guruevi.

I was hoping to gather examples of data being stolen when services not using e2ee. Would be a useful thing to document so that policy makers can understand why they shouldn't ban e2ee.

If anyone has examples, I'd be very interested.

Seems like the type of story that should help policy makers understand that they shouldn't ban end-to-end encryption. The EU is talking of banning e2ee.

But can someone confirm that encryption would have prevented this?

The linked story says "The vulnerability allows hackers to gain unauthorized access to an affected MOVEit serverâ(TM)s database." So I guess the data was unencrypted on the server.

> the pointless nature of it all

A lot of things could be reduced to this, but does it really matter if you're looking at the real Proxima Centauri or a slice of Chorizo? What's the point of looking at art?

If looking at a "live" photo of Mars would get your mind racing about how far technology has come, then tune in and enjoy.

If you want to go do something else, that's fine too.

What do they mean by "it wonâ(TM)t be truly live"?

Only one picture every 50 seconds, 17 minute delay for transmission of the signal. Still "live", AFAICT. Those are just quality issues. Given the conditions, the quality is nothing to complain about.

He developed a definition for free software, the concept of copyleft, a set of licences to implement copyleft, he travelled the world for decades building support for this, he wrote code for GCC and GNU Emacs and a lot of other software projects that enabled others to make the packages we use today, he inspired campaigns against software patents, against DRM, against bad copyright laws.

And he persevered despite decades of insults and other people trying to ensure no one heard of his work.

Not sure of the current status, but I remember in 2007 that Alexandre Oliva reverse engineered the software for filing taxes in Brazil:

https://www.linux.com/news/fsf...

Very much looking forward to seeing the video of Richard's 17 March speech and the Right To Repair keynote!

I guess they'll arrive here: https://media.libreplanet.org/...

I'm obfuscating nothing. Here's a brief to the European Commission with my name on it:

https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/...

Medical data is covered in the GDPR, cloud stuff is in the DMA, the Data Act, and hardware stuff in the Directive on Defective Product Liability. Those are all ongoing if you'd like to get involved.

There might be some things that aren't covered and maybe a CRA is necessary, but the current proposed text says you cannot publish or import software unless it follows the requirements of the CRA. So, people in the EU will be hesitant to publish software and software from outside the EU that didn't follow the CRA during the design phase will not be available to people in the EU.

Even security patches. If there software being used in the EU and it has a vulnerability, and if someone outside the EU produces a patch or an updated version of the software, then this fix will not be available to people in the EU if the author did not provide all the documentation required by the CRA! People in the EU will be stuck using known-vulnerable software because of the CRA!

The W3C has indeed done fantastic work. With the new status, will they be more involved in policy work?

The EU is working on a new regulation on standard-essential patents. The legislative procedure is advancing on the Cyber Resilience Act, which makes it difficult to publish software (and serving a webpage with javascript seems to fit into that). And there's the issue of DRM (which shouldn't have been given support in the W3C standards, but what's done is done, let's look for how to improve the situation).

If W3C will be more active in policy, I'll be looking forward to working with them!

Remember, FSF isn't telling you to buy these things, it's just a guide for *if* you insist on buying tech. You can always get people socks or a jumper.

FSF's guide is also for people who put a lot of value on freedom. And I hope a lot of people do. But if you want to make a small effort, another interesting list is Mozilla's "Privacy Not Included":

https://foundation.mozilla.org...

I'm a huge fan of Firefox but an LWN comment just pointed out that they've been paying Mitchell Baker 2.5 million USD per year.

https://assets.mozilla.net/ann...

I was going to sign up for their VPN service as a way to support them (and I probably stil will) but damn this makes me feel like a punk.