On Tuesday 15 September 2020 09:08:23 Felmon Davis wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Sep 2020, William Morder via tde-users wrote:
> > Better not to give in to conspiracy-theory thinking here. I believe a
> > simpler proportion is at work.
> >
> > The more money, property or power is involved, the greater the degree of
> > corruption. Who was it that said it? Lord Acton? "Power corrupts.
> > Absolute power corrupts absolutely."
> >
> > Corruption creeps in by small degrees. It starts with somebody offering
> > front-row seats at some special, exclusive event, or just being given
> > "free money" or other unearned bonuses and perks.
> >
> > In all this technophobic conspiracy thinking, there is a simpler
> > principle at work. People who are in business want to know who are their
> > customers. (It makes more sense in a small business, where we meet in
> > person.) When we move into situations where the people in business never
> > actually meet most of their customers, they must find other ways to get
> > to "know" them. At first, I'm sure, they mean well, and only want to
> > serve the needs and wants of people who buy or use their goods and
> > services; but as the company and customer base grows, and as competition
> > also increases, then comes the need for greater control.
> >
> > And now, we the users are not even really exactly "customers" or
> > "clients", but just use what we get for free; and because it's free, of
> > course, we are taught that we should not complain or make demands, but
> > just be grateful.
> >
> > In the end, we, the customers, users, renters (whatever our situation)
> > become the least important part; in fact, an obstacle to doing business.
> > What the business person would prefer, really, is just to withdraw money
> > directly from our accounts, without any interaction from ourselves. But
> > this is only because doing business in person is becoming a rare occasion
> > any more.
> >
> > Bill
>
> there may be truth in some of this but it seems a bit like
> thread-drift - perhaps retraction of apfelstr�ust be considered;
> how does this relate to systemd-homed?
>
> it seems systemd-homed brings precisely the benefit which Kate
> mentioned is lacking in our usual way of moving 'home'; she wrote:
>
> "I don't understand why this is even needed?! I can already move home
> directories without a problem. Been doing it for years. I just make
> sure to use the same user on the same distro, same etc. Works
> perfectly. Or I save key settings (konq bookmarks, FF bms, etc) it's
> so easy after that to just retheme to spec."
>
> I take it with systemd-homed one doesn't get trapped by shifting UIDs
> and such. they write (partial quotation),
>
> "Linux assigns UIDs in the order usernames are registered on a
> machine. you may get UID 1000 if you are the first user on a laptop
> and you could get 1001 on another laptop if you are the second user to
> be registered there. This poses a problem if you move a home directory
> container from machine A where you're UID 1000 to machine B where you
> are 1001. systemd-homed solves this by doing a chown -R on the entire
> home directory if there is a conflict. [...]"
>
> I once fell athwart of that! not to mention that 'home' gets encrypted.
>
> why isn't this a net bonus?
>
> f.
I agree, lots of thread drift here. We really ought to start a new thread once
we get into philosophy and politics and stuff.
For me, the jury is still out on homed, at least as a concept. All those
benefits do seem double-plus good and all. What I don't like is systemd,
because it was thrust upon us without consent, over the objections of many
developers themselves, and goes directly against the philosophy of Debian
(too much explanation required here).
Maybe it is a good thing; some seem to think so, but systemd takes control
away from users themselves, in many small ways. I don't like it myself mainly
because my system doesn't run so well with systemd.
And, if I read correctly, you can't get homed without systemd. But homed,
which does sound good in so many ways, will somehow (I suspect) be used to
get people using systemd.
Maybe there is somebody who is already thinking of a systemd-free homed
system? Is it possible?
Again, if you are content with what you have, then it's hard for me to argue
that you [the universal you] ought to be doing something different, just
because, in my opinion, it's better or more secure or whatever. If you like
what you have, and don't want to change, then just keep shining on.
Bill
--
_______________________________________________
tde-users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Web mail archive available at https://mail.trinitydesktop.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
