Malsasa

Why is Windows popular?

Because Windows has been mass produced. Same reason applies to Android's popularity, and to Google Search's, because the latter was the default on your web browser and on Android too. Reversely, why is desktop GNU/Linux not popular? Because it has not been mass produced. By mass production it means a particular type of distribution which is mostly successful as a means to popularity.

Why popularity do centralization?

Because a popular thing attracts many people to it and this forms a centralization. There is nothing wrong with being centralized as nothing wrong with being popular. Decentralization efforts will eventually be centralized whenever one point in the network being more popular than the others. By resources, to be fair centralization is lighter and easier to implement while decentralization is not more implementable and not more sustainable.

This is my opinion: GNU/Linux must be mass produced as computers. It is because the reason why proprietary software dominate all areas of computing is mass production as proven by Microsoft Windows (including MS-DOS) in collaboration with all PC brands, Apple MacOS with their own Macintoshes, and even Google Android in collaboration with all phones manufacturers. By reverse understanding, I am sure that Windows, MacOS and Android along with countless numbers of proprietary software coming with them will not be popular nor dominate most the users if they had not being mass produced. To win computer user's freedom, we need mass production of GNU/Linux. I proudly agree with Respects Your Freedom, Purism, LaptopWithLinux, Entroware, Starlabs, System76, and ThinkPenguin and any other mass production efforts to deliver GNU/Linux and Free Software as built-in computers to the users.

Why we should reject and quit Chrome.

1. Chrome is proprietary software and does not respects user freedom. This reason alone is enough to leave it.
2. Chrome is malware.
3. Chrome is surveillance instrument by Google company against the users. It is part of Google's way of business of selling user's profile to advertising companies. As a consequence, it is a part of GAFAM.
4. Spies everything that user types in address bar, tracks user's history and affiliations then silently report them to Google and unknown companies.
5. Blacklisted by secure, privacy focused operating systems namely Parabola and Hyperbola.
6. Privacy enhanced versions exist namely Iridium Browser as well as Ungoogled clearly showing Chrome's serious privacy issues.
7. Instrument of FLoC.

That's enough.

---

Send your comments to my email.

First, Flatpak download is too large for internet quota. Second, Flatpak downloaded is too large for hard disk capacity. Third, Flatpak installation slows down my entire computing.

I have an excellent example when I install a program which normally takes up to 100-200 megabytes with Flatpak I ended up with 1 gigabyte download and 7 gigabytes storage space in 1 hour time. I experienced a lot of hangs while Flatpak is installing it heavily disturbs other computing works I was doing. Below is my disk space measurement before and after I install one application using Flatpak.

Before: [master@master ~]$ df -h / Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda4 27G 7.2G 19G 29% /

After: [master@master ~]$ df -h / Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sda4 27G 15G 12G 56% /

Flatpak consumes incredibly too much computer disk space. I believe any computer user with common sense will not like this.

I understand the goodness of Flatpak. However, I do not understand why people do not dislike it. In my opinion, if you use Flatpak, you must be a wealthy person, with a lot of computing power, eight-fold gigabytes of memory, terabytes of disk spaces, and more importantly unlimited internet access. Most people do not have such luxury.

This is my issue with Flatpak.

This is for computer beginners. Basically, computer in general is divided into two parts, hardware for the touchable part, and software for the untouchable part. Software is supposed to be controlled by the user in user's computing — however, in reality software is also divided into two, the kind of software which is controlled by the user, and another kind of software which is controlled not by the user. Humans in general always think that software is the first kind above, while in reality most software are factually the second kind. To do computing, everyone needs and should use the software that is controlled by the user. So you live normal life, not controlled by the developer, not restricted by them, and not damaged by people other than them. The ones controlled by user is called Free Software and the ones controlled not by user is called Nonfree Software where Free and Nonfree here refer to user's controls and not price of the things. Now you know there are two kinds of software.

https://cloud.operationtulip.com/s/e4JREW4S4ixj3fQ

Let's see what we all want:

• Friends
• Basic chats, Group chats
• Channels and bots
• Voice calls, Video calls, Video conferences
• File sharing, unlimited
• Screen sharing
• Fast, Easy
• Web access, Multidevice
• No cost

For most people without software freedom knowledge, they will tend to choose solutions like Allo, Line, Messenger, Slack, Skype, Viber, WhatsApp, or Zoom.

For people with software freedom knowledge, they will tend to choose solutions like Element, Jami, Signal, Telegram, XMPP, or Wire.

For me, it does not need long time to choose Telegram. For XMPP, I cannot get most of those while I can with Telegram. So XMPP to me is costing much more but I get less.

Let's see what we don't really needs:

• Federation, if made features above unusable
• E2EE, if made features above unusable
• P2P, if it disables speed, push notifications, and multidevice

If only XMPP has a clear star with mentioned features usable, I can give it a try. The only star closer to this is Movim but as I tried it is still far. So I do not use XMPP.

Because Telegram is the first, the desktop messenger, and the easiest of all I tried. Telegram is the richest as it has everything I need to make online learning classroom. My case is unique as at that time (2014) I still had phone so I can register to it on my desktop and use it until today. Today I do not own phone nor number anymore. Important part of my reasoning was I disliked WhatsApp at that time which discriminated GNU users aside from being nonfree and could not be used on desktop. I say Telegram is ready. So here's why not the others from me.

Why not Signal?

I do not have phone while my main device is desktop. The reality is I cannot use Signal mainly on desktop while with Telegram I can. Signal is still poor in features and fanciness, just look at how Telegram presents everything to you (blog, news, features, channels, bots), so to me it is inferior. Even if I knew Signal at 2014, I would still choose Telegram anyway.

Why not Element?

Riot.im or now known as Element is not stable. Ironically, it becomes unusable because of its own security system (I admire Signal who can make this easy and usable). I and students cannot use it just like we use Telegram free from hassles. Compared to others, today this is the one closest to Telegram. However, even if Element was existed at 2014, I would still picked Telegram anyway. Element is not ready.

Why not XMPP?

Because XMPP is confusing for most people. For normal people point of view, we just want to communicate, not to choose different servers nor different clients nor involved in security talks. The only closer to Telegram from XMPP is Movim. However, it is still not as feature rich as Telegram. If only I knew XMPP or Movim at that time, I would still choose Telegram anyway. It is not ready.

Why not Jami?

I am a GNU Teacher so naturally I should prefer GNU applications but Jami is still not stable like Element. Too slow to send messages, too not reliable to share files, and not as feature rich as Telegram. Important feature of Telegram is web access and Jami does not have it. It is not ready.

Why not Session?

Like Signal, Session is also good free software. However, Session is too limited in features, would be too difficult to my students, and no web access as well.

Why not security, federation?

When you read this you will see I did not talk about security nor federation. So did most people. My purpose is focused on migrating people from nonfree to free software (mostly from WhatsApp to Telegram), I believe this is a noble job, and it is already a huge job heavy to bear. I do not want to add more focus. I do not focus on security or federation of course. It is a matter of strategy: once they felt free software, they will learn and develop to appreciate security and federation later – so let's not burden them and me with too much focuses. Let those carried by someone else.

I like Telegram.

WhatsApp is a proprietary software – computer program that the user is not free from being controlled by the developer. Since 2014, I already disliked it on the basis of discrimination, that is, it did not available for my operating system GNU/Linux while at the same time I did not own smartphone on those days. This feeling of discrimination was so severe to me when I saw everyday all my friends could communicate while only I could not. Since that time I disliked and had never used nor recommended it for everyone.

Now I disliked it more or more precisely rejected it on the basis that is stronger, because it is injustice, as every proprietary software is unjust to its user. I remember golden sayings from The GNU Project and here I convey them to you but some with my own words. Using WhatsApp is doing wrong to yourself as you give somebody else power over your own computing. And from the valuable page Proprietary Sabotage, listen, “This demonstrates what we've said for years: using proprietary software means letting someone have power over you, and you're going to get screwed sooner or later.”.

Now as per earlier 2021, millions of people worldwide learned to # Delete WhatsApp, on the basis of protecting privacy. They learned something, I learned too. Now I disliked it even more as there is more reason to reject it. However, we should beware long time ago before this case, because years ago it has been owned by Facebook, one among the biggest anti-freedom anti-privacy companies in the world, and more precisely because it is proprietary software. There are already gigantic reasons to reject WhatsApp. You should not need to wait it shows a bad Terms of Service like today to reject it. You can start help yourself by rejecting proprietary software on your phone and computer devices.

Stop WhatsApp.

What is Mastodon? It is a new social networking site. Seeing from popular opinions, it is similar to Twitter. Seeing from technical opinions, unlike Twitter, it is created after the internet so the social network is in itself social towards other social network. The mix of these results in myself like it the most more than any other social networks

https://linustechtips.com/topic/802163-clevo-custom-laptops-and-world-clevo-resellers/