Hello Timothy Pearson
wouldn't this way not be better: https://diasp.eu/posts/4205465 (compy of the Text below)
with kind regards Marc Jr Landolt eidg. dipl. Informatiker HF Rombachtäli 13 5022 Rombach +41 79 291 07 87 2009@marclandolt.ch
----------------------SNIP----------------------
Wouldn’t it be more useful / **rational** / environment-saving to legally gain access to the hidden (anti-)features of #Intel ME or the AMDxyz?
Reasons: -There are to much x86 Systems in use => d$/dt
-If these Systems eg have access to things like #US4877027 #WO2005055579A1 #US6169924B1 #US6506148 it does not really help to have one single system, that is not infected
-I guess ARM also isn’t State-Less-Computing [1] [me.TODO<learningList>.add(“Read ARM Specs”)] [1] https://media.ccc.de/v/32c3-7352-towards_reasonably_trustworthy_x86_laptops
-Worst case raptorengineeringinc.com would be a CIA/NSA #HoneyPot to find gifted FOSS Users for “pinguen-hunt” ? -it has the nasty eagle in the logo -twice the link is shown, so people click on it in the end => one exit point from this post (n!) -d$/dt would end at raptorengineeringinc.com -expensive 3700$, you can buy a Orange PI for 24$ inclusive shipment cost
“raptor and engineering” would attract ~20 Year old people, that just woke up from the american dream -raptor sounds cool -engineering appeals to the low self-esteem from 20 Year old man (like we all) that have not been cared of by their parents -inc suggests company, group, low self-esteem (Prerequisites: People that are alone += 🐧🐧🐧🐧)
word count of the post: [ATTACHEMENT]
-“more POWER” ⇨ low self-esteem ⇦ Stupid Parents!!!
Things we already know: http://marclandolt.ch/ml_buzzernet/2015/10/16/zusammenfassung-von-pinkibrain...
#Linux #Anon #Anonymous ?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 04/22/2016 10:28 PM, Marc Landolt wrote:
Hello Timothy Pearson
wouldn't this way not be better: https://diasp.eu/posts/4205465 (compy of the Text below)
No, we are not associated with nor do we work with the NSA. We are simply interested in retaining access to libre computing resources without having to jump back at least 10 - 20 years in available computing power.
To highlight the fact that we are not operating under outside orders, we even publish a warrant canary [1].
While certain countries *may* be able to semi-legally hack the ME and gain the requisite signing keys, much of the developed world will *not* be able to do that or use the resultant information. Further, you would be continuing a computing / security arms race purely for the sake of staying glued to an architecture that is not only effectively single source, but also has strong connections to corporations that are continually acting to take away computing liberty.
All I am attempting to do at this point is highlight the growing problem. If you don't care about raw computing power there are already several ARM-based options that make reasonable daily drivers, such as the ASUS C201. From my perspective, anyone continuing to purchase modern x86 systems after being made aware of this problem is simply accepting the fact that computers are now locked down appliances bound by an EULA, much like proprietary software. Personally I don't want to see that possible future happen; this will be an interesting several years...
[1] https://secure.raptorengineeringinc.com/content/base/canary.htm
- -- Timothy Pearson Raptor Engineering +1 (415) 727-8645 (direct line) +1 (512) 690-0200 (switchboard) http://www.raptorengineeringinc.com
On 2016-04-23 05:41, Timothy Pearson wrote:
... If you don't care about raw computing power there are already several ARM-based options that make reasonable daily drivers, such as the ASUS C201. From my perspective, anyone continuing to purchase modern x86 systems after being made aware of this problem is simply accepting the fact that computers are now locked down appliances bound by an EULA, much like proprietary software. ...
If you care about affordable raw computing power above ARM i.e. x86 systems, there are at least AMD Kabini and AMD Vishera (FX-xxxx) and AMD Opteron prcessors.
On 23/04/16 05:41, Timothy Pearson wrote:
On 04/22/2016 10:28 PM, Marc Landolt wrote:
Hello Timothy Pearson
wouldn't this way not be better: https://diasp.eu/posts/4205465 (compy of the Text below)
No, we are not associated with nor do we work with the NSA. We are simply interested in retaining access to libre computing resources without having to jump back at least 10 - 20 years in available computing power.
To highlight the fact that we are not operating under outside orders, we even publish a warrant canary [1].
While certain countries *may* be able to semi-legally hack the ME and gain the requisite signing keys, much of the developed world will *not* be able to do that or use the resultant information. Further, you would be continuing a computing / security arms race purely for the sake of staying glued to an architecture that is not only effectively single source, but also has strong connections to corporations that are continually acting to take away computing liberty.
All I am attempting to do at this point is highlight the growing problem. If you don't care about raw computing power there are already several ARM-based options that make reasonable daily drivers, such as the ASUS C201. From my perspective, anyone continuing to purchase modern x86 systems after being made aware of this problem is simply accepting the fact that computers are now locked down appliances bound by an EULA, much like proprietary software. Personally I don't want to see that possible future happen; this will be an interesting several years...
There are also various other ways to approach this, for example, I started a discussion about ARM-based NAS devices on the debian-arm list[1]. This is one market where the hardware is readily available and the fact it is low power is considered a virtue by most purchasers.
The ASUS C201 appears very weak in the specs. Some things that bother me are the screen resolution (only 768 pixels high) and it is USB 2 only. I don't like the Chrome logo on it either (or is that a sticker that comes off?). Are there slightly stronger alternatives?
Another strategic topic on this theme: people won't necessarily see this thread and throw away all their x86 equipment the same day. However, how can these ideas be introduced to people at the times when they are making purchasing decisions?
Regards,
Daniel
1. https://lists.debian.org/debian-arm/2016/04/msg00051.html
On Saturday 23. April 2016 10.34.10 Daniel Pocock wrote:
There are also various other ways to approach this, for example, I started a discussion about ARM-based NAS devices on the debian-arm list[1]. This is one market where the hardware is readily available and the fact it is low power is considered a virtue by most purchasers.
Indeed. Since I use a desktop machine and don't care about the high levels of integration that plague laptops, and since my desktop machine is over ten years old, I intend to get a low-power system to replace my current one at some point. My needs are modest, but people are increasingly reacting to the supposed "need" to have obscene amounts of RAM and CPU power just to do basic computing tasks, albeit in a world where every Web page wants to run scripts from a hundred sites, show ten videos or animations, and lay itself out over and over again.
The ASUS C201 appears very weak in the specs. Some things that bother me are the screen resolution (only 768 pixels high) and it is USB 2 only. I don't like the Chrome logo on it either (or is that a sticker that comes off?). Are there slightly stronger alternatives?
I can't answer shopping questions like this, but I've been interested in initiatives like EOMA-68 where thought has been directed towards making open hardware for such products. EOMA-68 is arguably progressing at an excruciatingly slow pace, which is understandable given the constraints involved, but certain vendors do appear to have seen an opportunity for collaboration with such initiatives.
Another strategic topic on this theme: people won't necessarily see this thread and throw away all their x86 equipment the same day. However, how can these ideas be introduced to people at the times when they are making purchasing decisions?
I think the usual themes of sustainability and privacy are pretty useful here. It doesn't hurt that the cost of the new wave of lower-performance devices makes them easier to consider.
I know this is tangential, but I guess what you discuss in that thread might have some overlap with what the FreedomBox people have been trying to do. The task of making a non-interactive install image is familiar to me because I myself pursued the multistrap route to get Debian working on my Ben NanoNote.
Paul
Am 23.04.2016 um 16:07 schrieb Paul Boddie: ...
... albeit in a world where every Web page wants to run scripts from a hundred sites, show ten videos or animations, and lay itself out over and over again.
This is becoming more and more of a problem for me. Many "modern" sites are unusable without scripting and with older browsers or hardware which don't provide up-to-date Javascript and enough speed to cope with the often crappy programming. An example is the site of Bern University http://www.unibe.ch which used to be really nice and usable but now won't run on any of my mobile phones (Nokia N900, an older Samsung-Android and a friend's older iPhone). On my PC it doesn't look nice and navigation isn't possible without Javascript. Ironically the relaunch is justified by the need to be usable with mobile phones.
Unfortunately ever more companies and organisations are "relauching" their websites in this manner. Is there any campaign be FSFE, FSF or other organisations protesting against this developement?
Or am I just an old fogey who isn't "with it"?
Best, Theo
On Sunday 24. April 2016 20.09.20 Theo Schmidt wrote:
Am 23.04.2016 um 16:07 schrieb Paul Boddie: ...
... albeit in a world where every Web page wants to run scripts from a hundred sites, show ten videos or animations, and lay itself out over and over again.
This is becoming more and more of a problem for me. Many "modern" sites are unusable without scripting and with older browsers or hardware which don't provide up-to-date Javascript and enough speed to cope with the often crappy programming. An example is the site of Bern University http://www.unibe.ch which used to be really nice and usable but now won't run on any of my mobile phones (Nokia N900, an older Samsung-Android and a friend's older iPhone). On my PC it doesn't look nice and navigation isn't possible without Javascript. Ironically the relaunch is justified by the need to be usable with mobile phones.
What do they call that again? Adaptive layout? Usually involving pieces of the page appearing jumbled in the browser before things suddenly jump into place, often just as one is about to click on something, thanks to some JavaScript element-decoration technique being all the rage amongst Web designers a few years ago. After all that effort, the result is often very familiar: layers of boxes upon boxes on a white background. I guess the consensus is that this looks good on an iPad.
And, of course, Twitter, Facebook and numerous "content delivery networks" and analytics sites all have to serve up content onto the megapage (links to other pages also being unfashionable on some sites). I actually don't run NoScript, but I do block certain sites and domains, but one disables things at one's own peril because the site may have decided that some random "asset" needs to be loaded or the site's core functionality won't work. Even if one's browser has to join a long queue of browsers needing to download, say, the jQuery libraries (for the hundredth time today) or some Web fonts.
Unfortunately ever more companies and organisations are "relauching" their websites in this manner. Is there any campaign be FSFE, FSF or other organisations protesting against this developement?
Or am I just an old fogey who isn't "with it"?
I fear that we are part of a small club whose opinion can't be heard above the chorus of squealing influencers and those without the long-term perspectives to realise just how absurd and wasteful this all is.
Paul
1. Web pages used to be documents.
2. Then interactive documents.
3. Now often programs that create interactive documents in the browser.
4. And sometimes just programs that fetch and display data.
5. And sometimes a program that is a sort of web browser in a web browser.
I think that 3 and beyond are only suitable for control interfaces.
My moment of realisation came 14-15 years ago working for a media company whose href were: javascript:window.navigate("/URL/...")
Absolute idiocy!
Sam On 24 Apr 2016 7:56 p.m., "Paul Boddie" paul@boddie.org.uk wrote:
On Sunday 24. April 2016 20.09.20 Theo Schmidt wrote:
Am 23.04.2016 um 16:07 schrieb Paul Boddie: ...
... albeit in a world where every Web page wants to run scripts from a hundred sites, show ten videos or animations, and lay itself out over and over again.
This is becoming more and more of a problem for me. Many "modern" sites are unusable without scripting and with older browsers or hardware which don't provide up-to-date Javascript and enough speed to cope with the often crappy programming. An example is the site of Bern University http://www.unibe.ch which used to be really nice and usable but now won't run on any of my mobile phones (Nokia N900, an older Samsung-Android and a friend's older iPhone). On my PC it doesn't look nice and navigation isn't possible without Javascript. Ironically the relaunch is justified by the need to be usable with mobile phones.
What do they call that again? Adaptive layout? Usually involving pieces of the page appearing jumbled in the browser before things suddenly jump into place, often just as one is about to click on something, thanks to some JavaScript element-decoration technique being all the rage amongst Web designers a few years ago. After all that effort, the result is often very familiar: layers of boxes upon boxes on a white background. I guess the consensus is that this looks good on an iPad.
And, of course, Twitter, Facebook and numerous "content delivery networks" and analytics sites all have to serve up content onto the megapage (links to other pages also being unfashionable on some sites). I actually don't run NoScript, but I do block certain sites and domains, but one disables things at one's own peril because the site may have decided that some random "asset" needs to be loaded or the site's core functionality won't work. Even if one's browser has to join a long queue of browsers needing to download, say, the jQuery libraries (for the hundredth time today) or some Web fonts.
Unfortunately ever more companies and organisations are "relauching" their websites in this manner. Is there any campaign be FSFE, FSF or other organisations protesting against this developement?
Or am I just an old fogey who isn't "with it"?
I fear that we are part of a small club whose opinion can't be heard above the chorus of squealing influencers and those without the long-term perspectives to realise just how absurd and wasteful this all is.
Paul _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list Discussion@fsfeurope.org https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
I agree, in fact, I am getting e-mails with scripts in, if I try and delete a lot of e-mails during a clear out it sometimes stalls saying something is wrong due to some java script running.
So e-mails are now mini web sites thunderbird blocks most of the content, unless i unblock it per e-mail but it is just a pain generally.
What is wrong with simple plain text e-mail.
Paul
Web pages used to be documents.
Then interactive documents.
Now often programs that create interactive documents in the browser.
And sometimes just programs that fetch and display data.
And sometimes a program that is a sort of web browser in a web browser.
I think that 3 and beyond are only suitable for control interfaces.
My moment of realisation came 14-15 years ago working for a media company whose href were: javascript:window.navigate("/URL/...")
Absolute idiocy!
Sam On 24 Apr 2016 7:56 p.m., "Paul Boddie" paul@boddie.org.uk wrote:
On Sunday 24. April 2016 20.09.20 Theo Schmidt wrote:
Am 23.04.2016 um 16:07 schrieb Paul Boddie: ...
... albeit in a world where every Web page wants to run scripts from a hundred sites, show ten videos or animations, and lay itself
out
over and over again.
This is becoming more and more of a problem for me. Many "modern"
sites
are unusable without scripting and with older browsers or hardware
which
don't provide up-to-date Javascript and enough speed to cope with the often crappy programming. An example is the site of Bern University http://www.unibe.ch which used to be really nice and usable but now won't run on any of my mobile phones (Nokia N900, an older Samsung-Android and a friend's older iPhone). On my PC it doesn't look nice and navigation isn't possible without Javascript. Ironically the relaunch is justified by the need to be usable with mobile phones.
What do they call that again? Adaptive layout? Usually involving pieces of the page appearing jumbled in the browser before things suddenly jump into place, often just as one is about to click on something, thanks to some JavaScript element-decoration technique being all the rage amongst Web designers a few years ago. After all that effort, the result is often very familiar: layers of boxes upon boxes on a white background. I guess the consensus is that this looks good on an iPad.
And, of course, Twitter, Facebook and numerous "content delivery networks" and analytics sites all have to serve up content onto the megapage (links to other pages also being unfashionable on some sites). I actually don't run NoScript, but I do block certain sites and domains, but one disables things at one's own peril because the site may have decided that some random "asset" needs to be loaded or the site's core functionality won't work. Even if one's browser has to join a long queue of browsers needing to download, say, the jQuery libraries (for the hundredth time today) or some Web fonts.
Unfortunately ever more companies and organisations are "relauching" their websites in this manner. Is there any campaign be FSFE, FSF or other organisations protesting against this developement?
Or am I just an old fogey who isn't "with it"?
I fear that we are part of a small club whose opinion can't be heard above the chorus of squealing influencers and those without the long-term perspectives to realise just how absurd and wasteful this all is.
Paul _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list Discussion@fsfeurope.org https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Discussion mailing list Discussion@fsfeurope.org https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Am 24.04.2016 um 20:55 schrieb Paul Boddie: ...
... and navigation isn't possible without Javascript. Ironically the relaunch is justified by the need to be usable with mobile phones.
What do they call that again? Adaptive layout? Usually involving pieces of the page appearing jumbled in the browser before things suddenly jump into place, often just as one is about to click on something, thanks to some JavaScript element-decoration technique...
I'm not much of a web-designer, but I do know that adaptive layout can be quite sensibly done alone with CSS. You can offer a classic design for PC-screens and squeeze it or jumble it up only for small screens. A problem seems to be physically small screens with a high resolution. I don't know if CSS alone can cope with this. Also the custom of most people holding their phones vertically instead of horizontally.
I can understand using Javascript instead of CSS and HTML for special stuff, such as online calculators, but today's web designers are using it more and more just for navigation. This we should fight.
...
...chorus of squealing influencers and those without the long-term perspectives to realise just how absurd and wasteful this all is.
I can't seem to identify who these people actually are. Everybody I ask says, leave it to the experts, they know what they are doing. I think rather that they don't seem to.
Best, Theo
Sorry for side track:
I'm not much of a web-designer, but I do know that adaptive layout can be quite sensibly done alone with CSS.
I thought it can be done with plain HTML5. <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width">
Though maybe we are talking about different issues?
-- -- Andres (he/him/his) Ham United Group Richmond Makerlabs
I thought the whole point of having web standards was to keep things simple, to be able to do tasks and present information / services in a way that will just work on a range of devices / browsers and operating systems.
It seems that in our rush to do this, and out do the competition some of these basic ideas go out of the window, sure you need to interact with databases and present up to the minute news / updates BUT there has to be ways to do this, the W3C adapt and update HTML to reflect this.
Sometimes I think we simply over complicate issues. Maybe the way to counter this is to simply promote web standards, I am sure there are lots of users out there, (with little technical knowhow) who can relate to websites not working properly or loading in so much that it slows the whole process to a crawl.
I like the list that highlights how things have progressed (or not perhaps) we need to find out What users really want.
Paul
On 25/04/16 09:16, amunizp wrote:
Sorry for side track:
I'm not much of a web-designer, but I do know that adaptive layout can be quite sensibly done alone with CSS.
I thought it can be done with plain HTML5.
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width">
Though maybe we are talking about different issues?
Andres (he/him/his) Ham United Group Richmond Makerlabs _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list Discussion@fsfeurope.org https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
On 04/24/2016 08:09 PM, Theo Schmidt wrote:
Or am I just an old fogey who isn't "with it"?
As we can see people here also see the problem with the obese websites. Here is a great talk on the topic: http://idlewords.com/talks/website_obesity.htm
Best, cmd
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
Mon, 25 Apr 2016 14:15:14 +0200 Cezary Drak napisał:
On 04/24/2016 08:09 PM, Theo Schmidt wrote:
Or am I just an old fogey who isn't "with it"?
I think that people start to see this problem more and more…
As we can see people here also see the problem with the obese websites.
Certainly! Recently I stumbled upon an article about the fact that average website now *weighs as much as original Doom installer* [1].
To me that's a sign that more and more people are thinking about this problem.
[1]: http://www.nerdcore.de/2016/04/21/average-webpage-size-is-the-same-size-as-d...
Regards, jwo - -- ___ . . Jakub Olczyk | Software Liberation Maniacs Kraków // \ |/ PGP 8B1F95F5 | https://www.slimak.matinf.uj.edu.pl \ // || All my messages should be signed with OpenPGP ... ,~~~~~~~~
Well, I think the main reason is, that web developers just don't know.
Dynamic appearing and hiding of conten can be done with CSS 2.1 (or earlyer versions if you keep it simple) including: - Single page sites with navigation - folding/unfolding navigation menues (even with clicking, not just hovering) - Option boxes appearing dynamically - Tooltips - side panels
Screen size adaptions can be done in CSS 3.0 (or earlyer, again if you do fine with little) including: - side bars folding to the bottom - button icons / button texts showing only on large screens - Navigation menus folding into "hamburger buttons" on small screens
Some other specials: - Video playback can be done in pure HTML (even before, but better with HTML-5) - Carussel animations can be done in CSS 3.0 (they suck anyway, but that's beside the point) - Highlighting image sections etc can be done... well not sure if earlyer than CSS 2.1
All this falls back gracefully, even if the respective CSS features are not supported.
= = = = = = = = = = = ADVERTISEMENT = = = = = = = = = =
So, who of you volunteers to implement this on the FSFE homepage?
We currently have: - the language switcher - the closing button on our translation warnings (e.g. http://fsfe.org/index.ru.html) - https://fsfe.org/about/fellows.en.html (should display a highlighted map, apparently defunct) - the caroussel animation on the frontpage - Tooltips on http://fsfe.org/timeline/ - the hamburger button (on small screens) - the contribution slider on http://fsfe.org/join - probably some more...
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
In most cases the CSS-Implementatios is *easyer* than doing the same in JavaScript.
A while ago I held a lightnig talk in front of some dozend web startup developers. I didn't prepare anything, I just happened to be in the same place drinking beer. When no one wanted to hold the first talk, I jumped in and showed some some of those hacks, mostly the hiding and unhiding thing. It turned out the audience was surprised. Some where even very interested, they just didn't know this was possible and easy.
Another reason is, I suspect, that some web developers, with regard to their sites, don't make the distinction between a document and an application. The argument is well founded with the Chomsky Hierarchy. Dynamics and interactivity, when introduced by CSS layouting are very different from the same dynamics, when they are introduced through JavaScript. They are much more controllable in regards to computer security and they avoid issues that come up in the context of Software Freedom.
The most down-to-earth argument (steming from this language class argument) is probably that CSS based interactivity doesn't interfere, even interacts with sensory aids and input aids. Those are not only required by users with bodily handicaps, but are also used in environments where people wear protective gear or operate machines while using a website.
Looking at code of modern web pages, I often suspect that the authors are not well aquainted with CSS. So it's really a matter of education. People in a 100,000 Euro start-up company might just be working on their first commercial web project after university.
Maybe it helps if we hang out on StackExchange more.
I found this on diaspora
loading button, written in pure css
http://codepen.io/jcoulterdesign/details/NxbePR
shows what IS possible, and how much css / html have matured.
Paul
Well, I think the main reason is, that web developers just don't know.
Dynamic appearing and hiding of conten can be done with CSS 2.1 (or earlyer versions if you keep it simple) including:
- Single page sites with navigation
- folding/unfolding navigation menues (even with clicking, not just
hovering)
- Option boxes appearing dynamically
- Tooltips
- side panels
Screen size adaptions can be done in CSS 3.0 (or earlyer, again if you do fine with little) including:
- side bars folding to the bottom
- button icons / button texts showing only on large screens
- Navigation menus folding into "hamburger buttons" on small screens
Some other specials:
- Video playback can be done in pure HTML (even before, but better with HTML-5)
- Carussel animations can be done in CSS 3.0 (they suck anyway, but that's beside the point)
- Highlighting image sections etc can be done... well not sure if earlyer than CSS 2.1
All this falls back gracefully, even if the respective CSS features are not supported.
= = = = = = = = = = = ADVERTISEMENT = = = = = = = = = =
So, who of you volunteers to implement this on the FSFE homepage?
We currently have:
- the language switcher
- the closing button on our translation warnings (e.g. http://fsfe.org/index.ru.html)
- https://fsfe.org/about/fellows.en.html (should display a highlighted map, apparently defunct)
- the caroussel animation on the frontpage
- Tooltips on http://fsfe.org/timeline/
- the hamburger button (on small screens)
- the contribution slider on http://fsfe.org/join
- probably some more...
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
In most cases the CSS-Implementatios is *easyer* than doing the same in JavaScript.
A while ago I held a lightnig talk in front of some dozend web startup developers. I didn't prepare anything, I just happened to be in the same place drinking beer. When no one wanted to hold the first talk, I jumped in and showed some some of those hacks, mostly the hiding and unhiding thing. It turned out the audience was surprised. Some where even very interested, they just didn't know this was possible and easy.
Another reason is, I suspect, that some web developers, with regard to their sites, don't make the distinction between a document and an application. The argument is well founded with the Chomsky Hierarchy. Dynamics and interactivity, when introduced by CSS layouting are very different from the same dynamics, when they are introduced through JavaScript. They are much more controllable in regards to computer security and they avoid issues that come up in the context of Software Freedom.
The most down-to-earth argument (steming from this language class argument) is probably that CSS based interactivity doesn't interfere, even interacts with sensory aids and input aids. Those are not only required by users with bodily handicaps, but are also used in environments where people wear protective gear or operate machines while using a website.
Looking at code of modern web pages, I often suspect that the authors are not well aquainted with CSS. So it's really a matter of education. People in a 100,000 Euro start-up company might just be working on their first commercial web project after university.
Maybe it helps if we hang out on StackExchange more.
-- Paul Hänsch ââ Webmaster, System-Hacker ââââââ Jabber: paul@jabber.fsfe.org ââ Free Software Foundation Europe_______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list Discussion@fsfeurope.org https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
--
On 2016-04-26 08:55, Paul sutton wrote:
loading button, written in pure css
http://codepen.io/jcoulterdesign/details/NxbePR
shows what IS possible, and how much css / html have matured.
That's just an animation right? Not an actual progress bar. It looks nice anyway.
There is a somewhat more dire problem when offering file uploads. Most browsers don't display a good upload bar on their own and the website just stalls while an upload is in progress.
After our mail exchange yesterday I've been playing around with HTTP chunked encoding. Here is a live chat that works without page flickering or polling. I've even tested it in Links2 ;-)
http://plutz.net/chunkchat.cgi
Test it in different browser windows. There is a sourcecode link on the top right of the page.
The same technique might be usable for live progress bars. I came up with it after I remembered a conversation i've been having with a YaCy developer. The YaCy interface uses chunking to deliver the latest search results even seconds after a response page has been loaded. There are probably other implemenations around, this must have been working since the nineties.
I'm also working on some (better looking) CSS demos for different stuff.
Paul Hänsch paul@fsfe.org writes:
Security tip: the chat seems to be vulnerable to CSRF attacks so any website can trick your browser into sending chat messages in your name (or "in your IP address").
On 2016-04-30 16:02, Timo Juhani Lindfors wrote:
Security tip: the chat seems to be vulnerable to CSRF attacks so any website can trick your browser into sending chat messages in your name (or "in your IP address").
Yes it does, this is a proof of concept, don't use it as is. Nonetheless, I thank you in general for reporting any findings of the sort.
IP adressed are not a good identifier anyway. On most occasions where I showed the program, the participants shared the same address. You would also expect the program to be save against accidental resubmission of the same message, so submission IDs would be a good idea. If you want to use this for anything productive, there should also be a surge protection.
Since the demo uses no authenticated sessions to protect, I've implemented a referer check. More reliable checks should be used in an environment wich maintains a real user session to track. This would exceed the scope of this demo.
BTW, this makes good further reading: https://www.owasp.org/index.php/OWASP_Top_Ten_Project
Thank you Paul and all others for the valuable info and insights! The motor of the whole thing seems to be:
1) Owners have money to spend and want to do something "new". Or people who have already done something "new", say: "Isn't ist about time you [or we] got a new website?"
2) Owners ask several companies for quotes for a new website.
3) Web developers are so engaged in their modern hi-tech world, that any political aspects are secondary, whereas even if the owners are themselves political, they are so clueless about webdesign and IT in general (except how to use their iThingy or WindowThing (or even GoogleThingy)), that they are easy prey for the web company.
I still don't know how to break this circle. Everybody intelligent I talk to aggrees with me in principle and then does the opposite (or says: "I trust the experts". (Of course this applies to most things in life. Right now my local council is bugging me by wastng my tax money and resources by noisily rebuilding a road which was already in perfect condition. Maybe we could expand Paul's reason to: "that people just don't know.")
Best, Theo
Am 25.04.2016 um 17:02 schrieb Paul Hänsch:
Well, I think the main reason is, that web developers just don't know.
...
On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 05:02:54PM +0200, Paul Hänsch wrote:
Well, I think the main reason is, that web developers just don't know. [cut...] = = = = = = = = = = = ADVERTISEMENT = = = = = = = = = =
So, who of you volunteers to implement this on the FSFE homepage?
We currently have:
- the language switcher
- the closing button on our translation warnings (e.g. http://fsfe.org/index.ru.html)
- https://fsfe.org/about/fellows.en.html (should display a highlighted map, apparently defunct)
- the caroussel animation on the frontpage
- Tooltips on http://fsfe.org/timeline/
- the hamburger button (on small screens)
- the contribution slider on http://fsfe.org/join
- probably some more...
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
In most cases the CSS-Implementatios is *easyer* than doing the same in JavaScript.
Interesting discussion. Current carousel is made with jquery, right? The repository is on svn only? No git?
Looking at code of modern web pages, I often suspect that the authors are not well aquainted with CSS. So it's really a matter of education. People in a 100,000 Euro start-up company might just be working on their first commercial web project after university.
Maybe it helps if we hang out on StackExchange more.
Most of people use frameworks (like Bootstrap) because it's so convenient. PureCss by Yahoo (released with BSD license) is probably one of the few frameworks committed to use only CSS? What would you recommend as CSS-only framework?
On Monday 25. April 2016 17.02.54 Paul Hänsch wrote:
- https://fsfe.org/about/fellows.en.html (should display a highlighted map, apparently defunct)
[...]
In most cases the CSS-Implementatios is *easyer* than doing the same in JavaScript.
The Fellowship Events on the wiki used to support CSS pop-ups on a map. You can't see that any more because the wiki doesn't seem to use EventAggregator, but there's a hint of it on the test instance:
http://wiki-test.fsfe.org/CategoryEvents
(Select "View as map".)
Unfortunately, I can't demonstrate it as there aren't any events on that wiki any more and I can't add any, either.
Maybe I'd use SVG for the map if I were doing that again.
Paul
P.S. I'm not sure what you'll do for content migration when you get to the pages on the wiki that used the ImprovedTableParser, but I recommend installing it again if necessary.
Dear all, I thought this was relevant to the conversation. more like crappy *future* websites. EME: making a covenant into a exit condition (Cory Doctorow EFF) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2016May/0004.html
-- -- Andres (he/him/his) Ham United Group Richmond Makerlabs
On 05/03/2016 08:55 PM, Paul Boddie wrote:
P.S. I'm not sure what you'll do for content migration when you get to the pages on the wiki that used the ImprovedTableParser, but I recommend installing it again if necessary.
One of those pages is the "Hardware Vendors" page: https://wiki.fsfe.org/Migrated/Hardware%20Vendors
During our regular meeting in Frankfurt we discovered this broken page. Unfortunately the old Wiki seems to be cleared so the page is not available in "readable" format right now.
Best Regards, Thomas
On Saturday 7. May 2016 12.34.01 Thomas Doczkal wrote:
On 05/03/2016 08:55 PM, Paul Boddie wrote:
P.S. I'm not sure what you'll do for content migration when you get to the pages on the wiki that used the ImprovedTableParser, but I recommend installing it again if necessary.
One of those pages is the "Hardware Vendors" page: https://wiki.fsfe.org/Migrated/Hardware%20Vendors
During our regular meeting in Frankfurt we discovered this broken page. Unfortunately the old Wiki seems to be cleared so the page is not available in "readable" format right now.
Thanks for looking into this!
The parser used is this one:
https://moinmo.in/ParserMarket/ImprovedTableParser
It also needs some libraries that were developed for Moin extensions:
http://hgweb.boddie.org.uk/MoinSupport
The reason for developing such a parser is that Moin's tables are not very nice to edit once they have column data above a certain size. Moreover, the standard Moin table only supports limited formatting, unlike MediaWiki's tables (although MediaWiki's syntax is not as nice, generally).
As for that page itself, it probably needs another update or two. A recent discussion on this list indicated a level of interest in open hardware platforms, and some of the vendors sell open hardware as well as the usual products running Free Software, so perhaps there's some interest in maintaining a reliable resource about such topics.
Paul
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 04/23/2016 03:34 AM, Daniel Pocock wrote:
There are also various other ways to approach this, for example, I started a discussion about ARM-based NAS devices on the debian-arm list[1]. This is one market where the hardware is readily available and the fact it is low power is considered a virtue by most purchasers.
The other thing I would encourage is MIPS-based platforms for routing devices. There are a number of options on the market already, some with quite a number of GbE network ports built in.
The ASUS C201 appears very weak in the specs. Some things that bother me are the screen resolution (only 768 pixels high) and it is USB 2 only. I don't like the Chrome logo on it either (or is that a sticker that comes off?). Are there slightly stronger alternatives?
It is fairly weak; there hasn't been a lot of push to create stronger alternatives that still respect the owner's rights. The POWER systems are the only real option on the high end, leaving middle-ground users (including higher-end laptop users) without any options. This probably won't change for a while due to razor-thin margins in the mid-range arena and lack of overall demand.
That all being said, there are some stronger ARM Chromebooks coming down the line this year. Google Oak is one platform to watch; the SoC used in those machines gives you ARM64 plus virtualization, but sadly that machine is not yet available to the public.
Another strategic topic on this theme: people won't necessarily see this thread and throw away all their x86 equipment the same day. However, how can these ideas be introduced to people at the times when they are making purchasing decisions?
You're correct, and we're not advocating that people dump their existing machines, only that this is considered when purchasing another machine. What I personally would like to see is the major FOSS projects and distros starting to think beyond x86, perhaps by compiling and testing their software on ARM / POWER as well as x86, even if they are continuing to develop on older x86 machines for the time being. In the case of router distributions (pfSense comes to mind) the developers should start focusing on providing (at minimum) an ARM or MIPS port; this would also have the bonus of lowering the power consumption of the router package.
As you say, the current Opteron 4xxx/6xxx series devices are currently adequate for most work. The danger is complacency; 5 - 10 years from now those chips will be wholly inadequate for many common tasks and there may be no way to upgrade in performance without also sacrificing freedom.
I should also point out that all recent AMD chips, including the upcoming Zen Opteron CPUs and the modern FX-series devices, require signed binary blobs to boot. They are not free and, worse, by design, they can never be freed. AMD has also refused to release any documentation on the A1200 series devices, and it is highly likely they will also require a signed TrustZone binary to boot.
- -- Timothy Pearson Raptor Engineering +1 (415) 727-8645 (direct line) +1 (512) 690-0200 (switchboard) http://www.raptorengineeringinc.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 23/04/16 23:05, Timothy Pearson wrote:
On 04/23/2016 03:34 AM, Daniel Pocock wrote:
There are also various other ways to approach this, for example, I started a discussion about ARM-based NAS devices on the debian-arm list[1]. This is one market where the hardware is readily available and the fact it is low power is considered a virtue by most purchasers.
The other thing I would encourage is MIPS-based platforms for routing devices. There are a number of options on the market already, some with quite a number of GbE network ports built in.
The ASUS C201 appears very weak in the specs. Some things that bother me are the screen resolution (only 768 pixels high) and it is USB 2 only. I don't like the Chrome logo on it either (or is that a sticker that comes off?). Are there slightly stronger alternatives?
It is fairly weak; there hasn't been a lot of push to create stronger alternatives that still respect the owner's rights. The POWER systems are the only real option on the high end, leaving middle-ground users (including higher-end laptop users) without any options. This probably won't change for a while due to razor-thin margins in the mid-range arena and lack of overall demand.
That all being said, there are some stronger ARM Chromebooks coming down the line this year. Google Oak is one platform to watch; the SoC used in those machines gives you ARM64 plus virtualization, but sadly that machine is not yet available to the public.
Another strategic topic on this theme: people won't necessarily see this thread and throw away all their x86 equipment the same day. However, how can these ideas be introduced to people at the times when they are making purchasing decisions?
You're correct, and we're not advocating that people dump their existing machines, only that this is considered when purchasing another machine. What I personally would like to see is the major FOSS projects and distros starting to think beyond x86, perhaps by compiling and testing their software on ARM / POWER as well as x86, even if they are continuing to develop on older x86 machines for the time being. In the case of router distributions (pfSense comes to mind) the developers should start focusing on providing (at minimum) an ARM or MIPS port; this would also have the bonus of lowering the power consumption of the router package.
Debian already does that:
https://buildd.debian.org/ (see the list of CPU architectures across the top of the table)
Here is an example for one of my own packages built on all architectures. The build also runs the unit tests on every architecture, to catch any big endian issues, etc:
https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=resiprocate&suite=sid
Another thing that comes to mind: getting some of this hardware out in public at events. What would it take to have some POWER-based systems on display at LinuxWochen and MiniDebConf Vienna (28 April - 1 May) this week, or at DebConf in July?
Vienna would be good because there is a lot of official interest in reducing the dependency on US technologies: http://techrights.org/2009/12/11/osor-updates/
and there are various projects going on there already.
As you say, the current Opteron 4xxx/6xxx series devices are currently adequate for most work. The danger is complacency; 5 - 10 years from now those chips will be wholly inadequate for many common tasks and there may be no way to upgrade in performance without also sacrificing freedom.
I should also point out that all recent AMD chips, including the upcoming Zen Opteron CPUs and the modern FX-series devices, require signed binary blobs to boot. They are not free and, worse, by design, they can never be freed. AMD has also refused to release any documentation on the A1200 series devices, and it is highly likely they will also require a signed TrustZone binary to boot.
On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 09:29:55AM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote: ...
Debian already does that:
https://buildd.debian.org/ (see the list of CPU architectures across the top of the table)
Here is an example for one of my own packages built on all architectures. The build also runs the unit tests on every architecture, to catch any big endian issues, etc:
https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=resiprocate&suite=sid
Another thing that comes to mind: getting some of this hardware out in public at events. What would it take to have some POWER-based systems on display at LinuxWochen and MiniDebConf Vienna (28 April - 1 May) this week, or at DebConf in July?
with some luck, there will be a novena at the MiniDebconf (we have at least a talk, i would have to ask philipp if he is there just for his talk or if he has more time...
Vienna would be good because there is a lot of official interest in reducing the dependency on US technologies: http://techrights.org/2009/12/11/osor-updates/
and there are various projects going on there already.
well, the advances of the city goverment are unfortunatly mixed...
regards, albert
UPDATE:
staying glued to an architecture that is not only effectively single source, ...
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/AMD-lizenziert-erstmals-x86-Technolog...
sorry German article, if you don't mind, may I ask you your opinion about this?
AMD licensed first x86 technology to third parties
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%...
with kind regards Marc Landolt
On 04/23/2016 05:41 AM, Timothy Pearson wrote:
On 04/22/2016 10:28 PM, Marc Landolt wrote:
Hello Timothy Pearson
wouldn't this way not be better: https://diasp.eu/posts/4205465 (compy of the Text below)
No, we are not associated with nor do we work with the NSA. We are simply interested in retaining access to libre computing resources without having to jump back at least 10 - 20 years in available computing power.
To highlight the fact that we are not operating under outside orders, we even publish a warrant canary [1].
While certain countries *may* be able to semi-legally hack the ME and gain the requisite signing keys, much of the developed world will *not* be able to do that or use the resultant information. Further, you would be continuing a computing / security arms race purely for the sake of staying glued to an architecture that is not only effectively single source, but also has strong connections to corporations that are continually acting to take away computing liberty.
All I am attempting to do at this point is highlight the growing problem. If you don't care about raw computing power there are already several ARM-based options that make reasonable daily drivers, such as the ASUS C201. From my perspective, anyone continuing to purchase modern x86 systems after being made aware of this problem is simply accepting the fact that computers are now locked down appliances bound by an EULA, much like proprietary software. Personally I don't want to see that possible future happen; this will be an interesting several years...
[1] https://secure.raptorengineeringinc.com/content/base/canary.htm
VORWORT:
Egal wie diese Bewerbung ausgeht, das [securityChips.png] und den Link [1] sollten Sie Ihrem besten Mann/Frau zukommen lassen, ich vermute für Leute die ihre Server in Colocations... haben, kommen unbequeme Fakten zu, Details geben wir bekannt sobald wir sie "erarbeitet" haben.
Vorab: VHDL's für Funk-Kanäle (nicht die Standard WLAN Frequenzen) sind frei Verfügbar... und sind wohl als "Schlangenöl" in "Sicherheits"Chips gewandert.
Das entsprechende System müsste mich jetzt "zur Verteidigung" als Feind, Richter oder Verbrecher darstellen, was halt grad auf Ihren BigData Datensatz "passt" um Aversion zu erwirken.
[1] https://media.ccc.de/v/32c3-7146-hardware-trojaner_in_security-chips
Guten Tag
ich würde mich gerne auf Ihre Stelle aus jobs.ch bewerben. Als Informatiker HF mit 15+ Jahren Berufserfahrung bringe ich die nötigen Fähigkeiten mit.
Die genannten Methoden & Technologien kenne ich recht gut. Ich habe ausserdem bereits mit 6 meine ersten Elektronikbausätze zusammengelötet, kenne mich also auch mit Hardware aus. Ich habe aber auch Ahnung von anderen Fachgebieten & kann mich schnell in ein neues (technisches) Teilgebiet einarbeiten.
Ansonsten bin ich dynamisch, leistungsorientiert, freundlich, ehrlich, schlau, gebildet und hilfsbereit.
Falls ich Ihr Interesse geweckt habe finden Sie weitere Angaben zu meiner Person unter: http://www.marclandolt.ch/Beruf/Lebenslauf.pdf
und meine Zeugnisse auf: http://www.marclandolt.ch/Beruf/Zeugnisse.pdf
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 04/24/2016 09:58 PM, Marc Landolt wrote:
UPDATE:
staying glued to an architecture that is not only effectively single source, ...
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/AMD-lizenziert-erstmals-x86-Technolog...
sorry German article, if you don't mind, may I ask you your opinion about this?
AMD licensed first x86 technology to third parties
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%...
with kind regards Marc Landolt
That move was highly unexpected. A number of people in the industry seem certain AMD is violating their license terms with Intel by doing this, and unfortunately it really won't be known if this is actually allowed until Intel officially responds and / or the matter is decided in court. Furthermore the details on exactly *what* is being licensed seem few and far between; it is very possible what is actually being licensed is a much older variant of x86 for SoC use along with some of AMD's more recent ARM technology (remember the A1200 is considered an "Opteron" CPU).
Assuming we are actually talking about mainstream, high-performance x86, until the legality of this move becomes clearer any chips created under this deal may be restricted to Asian markets, which does not help those of us in Western regions. There is precedent for market segmentation of x86 CPUs due to licensing issues with the UMC Green CPU; only time will tell what this deal means in terms of x86 licensing and multiple sourcing capabilities.
- -- Timothy Pearson Raptor Engineering +1 (415) 727-8645 (direct line) +1 (512) 690-0200 (switchboard) http://www.raptorengineeringinc.com
