For a lot of project "compiling yourself", while obviously more involved than running some magic install command, is really not that tedious. Good projects have decent documentation in that regard and usually streamline everything down to a few things to configure and be done with it.
What's aggravating is projects that explicitly go out of their way to make building them difficult, removing existing documentation and helper tools and replacing them with "use whatever we decided to use". I hate these.
I'm trying a new approach. Since I won't touch anything beyond W10, and W10 is getting officially phased out, I just informed people that I won't provide tech support for W11 and beyond.
Not at all. I'm arguing that often, the issues, and fixes, are not distribution-dependant. Which is a good thing; it means we can go to arch forum and find fixes that can be applied in other distros most of the time, for example.
But people keep pitting them against each other like they're some form of evolved lifeforms that necessarily have to erase others, when a lot of the issues are just generic software issues.
And, since this is already a justification post I'll take the lead and note that it does not mean that there is no distribution-specific issues. Of course there are. The point is that most software issue in distribution X will have the same cause and fix in distribution Y, and often have nothing to do with either specific distributions.
Because they want to "protect" you from "yourself". Imagine, you could scrape your own data that you can already see.
I'd be really worried if the security of server operation for my bank depended on the client-side. But playing devils advocate, some people will most likely point out that a root exploit on a phone may be unintentional and used to spy on people, to which I answer:
show me a big scary box where I can "accept the risk" and move on
keep in mind that if I am root on my phone, I can hide the fact that I am root on my phone and you'll be none the wiser
Root access means any app installed could potentially access sensitive banking
That's not how it work. Having a rooted phone does not turn it into a digital farwest were every application can do anything. It becomes a permission like everything else; if you only grant it to safe stuff (like, for example, not granting root to a single app but using it to customize your phone through ADB), there's not much to see here.
So? If I, the customer, want to access my banking info, on my phone, with whatever means I want, I should be able to. As I said, it's not like every app gets root access, if I, as the owner of the device, explicitly gave root access to something, it's for a reason.
And the main point that a rooted phone can basically hide itself from any app remains; these "detections" are trivially bypassed in the exact situation they're supposed to detect.
You really are missing the point that if the device is rooted there is nothing an app can do to protect itself. Defense in depth is layering (sometimes overlapping) solutions that do something. Detecting root and saying "nuh-uh" is not doing anything.
Flatpak haters seem to believe that if an app isn't on their distro's repos, it's the developers' fault. ( lemmy.world ) Englisch
Don't mess up secure boot with bitlocker Englisch
https://www.tomshardware.com/software/windows/windows-11-24h2-will-enable-bitlocker-encryption-for-everyone-happens-on-both-clean-installs-and-reinstalls
the fear of missing out a better compression ( lemmy.world )
Source - Posted with Reddy
Just use it. Now. ( lemmy.world )
And Debian is supposed to be the stable one ( lemmy.ca )
The last two upgrades have broken my audio setup....
making fun of windows is our most treasured tradition ( lemmy.world )
You shouldn't ignore it ( lemmy.world )
Security ( discuss.tchncs.de )
Why don't banks like root on Android? ( lemmy.world )