You could just change your DNS server to get around that though, even without the password.

DNS level blocking is a massive pain to circumvent. Adguard DNS and NextDNS allow you to do this. Mullvad DNS allows you to block adult websites, gambling sites, and (optionally) social media without creating an account.

Differences are inconsequential aside from image manipulation, asyncio_websockets, librsvg, and AV1.

You can change the shortcuts on most desktops. At least I know you can on KDE and Cinnamon.

It comes with the exact keybindings for what you are used to from Windows.

Except Kate/Kwrite defaults to Ctrl+R for replace, CTRL+H for find selected, and something else I don’t remember. The shortcuts can be changed though.

Fedora and OpenSUSE, primarily.

Regardless, I can’t trust a distro with such a chaotic management structure on security.

Maybe the solution is to just, delete a bunch of kernel modules.

How many of them are actually important anyway?

I tried to update CachyOS just now and it couldn’t resolve the domain name.

Swapped out the malware filtering DNS Quad9 for whatever the default DNS is and it worked fine. Sure hope this doesn’t mean anything.

Samsung, no. Samsung can’t be trusted with anything. That would be like using Tor on Android.

Kinda weird there’s some insistence about open source only getting funding from the purest of sources.

Could be worse, and it’s free money.

1. DDoS a free and open source operating system.
2. ???
3. Profit.

The main problem is that it’s just not battle tested like GNU coreutils are.

Mint is the last distro that would push something that isn’t battle tested. IIRC they haven’t even started working on Wayland support.

For installing apps and updating, it’s recommended to use the graphical utilities in CachyOS. Sometimes you might need to use pacman but it’s not the default.

If Windows 12 was just a Linux distro with Windows branding, it would probably be just as successful.

It would be amazing if Microsoft decided to open source Windows 95.

Firstly, the ID requirements for renting a place to live are a more apt example.

Secondly, it depends how the ID is used. If my ID isn’t being associated with my online traffic then it isn’t the end of the world.

You need ID to drive a car, which is essential in modern America. Worse still you need ID to rent a house and that’s normally getting fed straight into a massive insecure database. The advantage of Linux is that we could theoretically choose who we give our ID to (whether that’s Red Hat, Ubuntu, OpenSUSE, Debian, Arch, etc). Handing over your ID is necessary for some essential parts of modern life, and while I wouldn’t want to hand it over to access my operating system, I would be able to accept it.

Thinking critically, let’s imagine that only government approved companies could verify your ID and those companies are Google, Apple, Microsoft, and Persona. At that point I’d … really hate it but I’d hand over my ID. Then I’d double check my operating system isn’t logging and sharing my internet traffic.

There’s no indication that our online traffic will be required by law to be linked with our proven ID. If such a thing does happen, then firstly we are totally screwed, and secondly it would likely involve all major websites participating. We fundamentally won’t be able to get around it in that case.

Your response again doesn’t really follow from what I wrote. It retains some key words but not the ideas.

Browser fingerprinting which exists because the average person can’t be bothered concealing it and the theoretical sharing of your ID with the sites you visit due to a government mandate are two entirely different things. The relevant difference is that the government doesn’t mandate browser fingerprinting, it exists because it is technologically possible and the mitigation measures are more inconvenient than the average user is willing to deal with.

As for normalizing OS-level ID checks as a slippery slope towards sharing your full ID as part of a HTTP request … firstly that is not something you can get around with an alternative distro anyway, because it would involve all major websites. Secondly, that is a hypothetical within a hypothetical. Thirdly, if that really is the path that we’re on, now is not is not the most effective time to oppose it, because the slippery slope argument is far more persuasive from the bottom of the slope.

EDIT: I think I just did the same thing I accused you of, talking past you. My response basically just rejects your core conceit, that being a distinction between the private power-user experience and the non-private normie experience, and nothing else. I’ll need to edit this.

EDIT 2: Okay, fixed.