lckdscl [they/them]

I self-identify as an nblob, a non-binary little object.

  • 0 Posts
  • 49 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 10th, 2023

help-circle











  • Okay I think I might know what you mean? I just tried doing that and got it to work. We can compare what we did. Here’s mine.

    I created a shared folder called “Shared”

    then I create a group called “All” and mount the “Shared” folder to /shared

    I went to a user and add them to group “All”

    Examining that user’s files

    I can navigate into that shared folder and access everything (I have stuff in there already).



  • I know you meant well, but I don’t think their interpretation implied any logical fallacy. I used a conditional statement but my statement was prescriptive, not descriptive.

    The difference between “I should” and “I have to/must” is a modal one. I implied “if I have to X then I shouldn’t Y”. They swapped X and Y around to get “If I have to Y then I shouldn’t X”, which is just a plain misinterpretation. The use of what is and what ought implies a recommendation or opinion, not mutual exclusivity. For that, I would have to use the same modality “If I have to X then I must not do Y”.

    It’s like mixing up “If I have an infectious disease, I shouldn’t go outside” vs. “If I have to go outside, I shouldn’t have an infectious disease”. To me, they have a subtle difference. There is compromise and decision-making involved.

    I’ll spell it out anyway because why not. I can’t be bothered to edit my original comment. While it’s sensational-sounding, anyone who take issue with what I said don’t take surveillance properly so I can’t help them, while those that misinterpreted me like nous did can find out for themselves here.

    spoiler

    If I have to use Windows, then I can still use Tor understanding and accepting that the OS at the kernel level is a black box that logs and tracks whatever it wants. I can compromise because I might just want to read a blocked news site or Wikipedia. Likewise, if I’m stuck somewhere and I have to use Windows to use Tor then it is a compromise. But that doesn’t mean I shouldn’t use Tor. I’m responsible for my bad opsec should anything bad come my way.

    versus

    If I have to use Tor, then something is wrong with the way I’m able to access and/or spread information (I handle sensitive or illegal topics, that can harm me or others if found out), and I can’t do it privately because there is surveillance involved. At the kernel level windows is a blackbox that mishandle my data and has the ability to observe everything I do. Therefore I ought to not use Windows.



  • Yeah I agree. To be clear, if you take the reverse of my statement, i.e. if you’re on Windows, you shouldn’t use Tor, then I would be gatekeeping.

    But I’m not implying that, but rather the reverse. I’m saying if you have use Tor for whatever reasons to bypass censorship, do illegal stuff and avoid being tracked, you should at least be aware that at the kernel level, how you’re accessing the internet has already been compromised by Microsoft, and consider alternatives OSes

    Of course I’d still want people running Windows to be able to use Tor, and also I’d say leaving Windows isn’t something you would only do at the “highest threat model”.

    Privacy will almost always be a trade-off with convenience, I’m pushing the awareness to get people to act, should they choose to. That’s all.