Comments by "Gareth Hart" (@tgheretford) on "The Lunduke Journal" channel.

Two days and it's already evolved from "far-right" to "right". How long before people get blacklisted from being able to use an OS/distribution based on political grounds or inalienable characteristics?
132
This is what I feared when people were confidently saying "it's an unofficial Discord, nothing to worry about" - that the official channels and leadership have been compromised or infiltrated. Now I fear that things will escalate further and people will start being banned from using the distribution altogether for links to Lunduke or for their politics.
131
And when the Internet Archive disappears, there will be much rejoicing by large corporations as they will be able to move forward to monopolising access and control to information, knowledge and media. What happens to the Internet Archive, said corporations would like to see happen to physical libraries too. We will soon be entering an informational dark age. They will come for Wikipedia and other sites of knowledge.
102
How long before they a project decides to extend this "purge" to users and not just contributors? I fear it's only a matter of when, not if.
44
At this point only Government approved communication apps, heavily restricted and under surveillance will be allowed. "For your own safety and to uphold the law".
40
I think we're heading in two directions. In one way, the Internet for Government, private companies, organisations and foundations for trade, commerce and business. While private citizens face the end of the Internet for children's and their own "safety". There is a recent push with the online safety moral panic for a "reset" and follow the examples of authoritarian countries in introducing national Intranets with restricted International traffic and "digital border checks". At that point, a lot of publicly available information will be inaccessible.
31
The individuals who head up Arch Linux need to clarify their position as non-partisan and politically agnostic because this publicity is making them look bad. I'd start a thread over on the forums myself but 'no political discussion allowed' according to the Code of Conduct and I don't feel like appealing a ban.
20
We know what they will threaten with Android - "we will have to charge a monthly subscription fee to users". Apple and Microsoft will follow suit and it will be another step toward everything as a service.
16
Did Arch just assume the gender of their package manager? What if it wants to identify as pacperson?
15
The UK's proposal is to also require live verification via facial recognition. This is a hackers/blackmailers dream. Did we all forget Ashley Madison? This will be that on a grand scale. It will apply to all content not "safe for kids" besides adult websites.
10
Would you please explain how anti-Lunduke and vulgar political comments supporting left wing principles were being allowed on the official channels if they're supposed to be politically agnostic? I'd rather not be made persona non-grata for civilly asking for clarification on their political stance for assurance.
10
Large corporations disagree. They believe they should be the sole decider of whether media should be preserved and it should be only their decision. And once a piece of media stops being profitable, they believe they have the right to destroy that media. Which is why they've embraced the 'as a service' model. These corporations are also the ones with lobbying power. No-one is going to want to run a library or archiving service if they face ruinous consequences which means the only option means large corporations place everything behind a walled garden and paywalls. It will also destroy the concept of individuals being able to upload content to a website because we don't know if any copyright infringement may be committed by a single user - that will particularly affect YouTube. What we are going to see is the Internet moving to a wholly corporate controlled landscape that most will be priced out of.
10
Authors and publishers detest second hand sales and loaning because they don't make royalties. They want both banned and they would be happier if physical libraries disappeared, never mind digital ones.
8
This has wide reaching consequences, right down to physical libraries and every other archiving service. The large conglomerates will ensure that all information, ideas and knowledge will be placed behind expensive paywalls in the same manner as peer reviewed papers are and society will be the worse for it. They want full and absolute control of all of that for their own profit, power and control. They detest loaning, renting and second hand sales because it deprives them of a royalty from a purchase. They do not want you renting a book, they want you to buy it. If the media is out of print, they want you to go without.
6
If they take down copyrighted material, all web pages snapshots you use for research are also copyright - whoopsie, Goodbye Wayback Machine. A whole lot of historical Internet data and information is now black holed forever. And this has consequences beyond the Internet.
6
A browser that isn't spyware (that's anything Google, Microsoft or Mozilla out the window). Supports Manifest v2 fully going forward (anything Chromium based is out - Thorium, Brave and Vivaldi out of the running - Brave having partial v2 support won't support the Manifest v2 extensions I use from June and there is no v3 alternative for technical reasons). Isn't woke, political or has a controversial background (we know of Librewolf but I've heard concerns regarding Zen and Waterfox). And it has to be supported (on Android, that's Kiwi and Mull out the running) From my research, it's Floorp on desktop and Fennec on Android. Unless anyone knows something I don't.
6
I wrote a long comment regarding my concerns and critiques of age verification from a UK perspective but I will wager that you or anyone else will not have seen it because YouTube shadowbans the majority of my comments for being a problematic person.
6
If the courts decide that the Internet Archive is not fair use, nor are physical libraries. This is a power grab to ensure that publishers have total control of media to get you to pay for media so they make royalties from every individual who wishes to consume that media.
5
@4eyesleo Except that's not what corporations want. They want exclusive control of all knowledge, information and ideas while lobbying for permanent copyright protection and permanent patents. The country that gives corporations that wish will be the one all the investment will go to. No country has blinked yet because of the dire consequences for humanity such a thing would achieve.
5
WineMomEnjoyer What happens when Brave has to remove manifest v2 support? There are a number of extensions I use that require it that are not an ad-blocker and therefore will never be implemented in a web browser.
5
Probably the opposite. It would be a very lucrative target to hold over the head of the world.
4
How they should have handled it is by saying "We are politically agnostic. Thread closed". Mass censorship and banning is a indicator they have something to hide.
3
@gevilin153 You're gonna need to update sometime and that's when IP bans come in. Not 100% effective but enough for someone to get the hint and leave.
3
@secretfox768 "Ideally, this video needs a clarification that the server mentioned is unofficial". Lunduke would have to take the video down and post a new video clarifying the situation. As things stand, he's in violation of YouTube's Terms of Service in terms of its misinformation policy by allowing the video to stay up. The pinned comment isn't enough to be in the clear. But the people who lead Arch also need to clarify that the people on Discord and Reddit do not represent the project as a whole and emphasise their commitment to being non-partisan and politically agnostic. Otherwise confidence will be shattered and users will migrate to projects such as OpenMandriva.
3
I'll speak from a UK perspective because that is what I am familiar with. We've just had the Online Safety Act pass and there will be requirements for age and ID verification in 2025 for all websites not "safe for kids", including social media ones (as they implement an age requirement for use). Their idea of synchronising ID checks with the real world means that Government photo ID as one and done (as used on with gambling sites) won't be legal next year. Their proposal is for both Government photo ID and live, ongoing facial recognition checks when you use the site via phone camera/webcam. That's going to be a problem for game consoles with age restricted games, but they'll legally have to implement something that passes the requirements by law. Now there's a problem. In the real world, your private ID isn't kept by the shopkeeper after every purchase, for online, it will be. And like in the real world, you will be asked for ID every single time you access a website as they require real world, live verification that you are the individual accessing that website and not passing it on to another individual after the initial verification. Now imagine the consequences if someone gets in by the back door to steal ID/images of facial recognition and then uses it for blackmail of individuals for cash gain or releases it as a "perverts database". We know what happened with Ashley Madison. In terms of online anonymity being abolished to rapturous applause, in future, I will have more anonymity in Speakers Corner than I would on the Internet. At least in the real world, while people can see me, they don't know who I am. I will have no choice online in future if I want to do anything beyond what you would see on a children's channel, in a school or at a nursery. This is why people are concerned and why people are downvoting this video. It is a consequence of the majority who want to outsource the parenting of children to the state. The problem is, the state treats everyone as a child for "your own safety".
3
@theeltea If you have issues with OpenMandriva's implementation of something that works with Arch, that is a problem. For example, programs that are in the AUR but are not in the OpenMandriva repos or Flatpak. I can think of a few I use off the top of my head. I could build them from source code but having an AUR helper is much more convenient.
3
@nuvotion-live Control of all art, media and intellectual property. There is a lot of stuff corporations deem piracy, including the use of VPNs to avoid geoblocks, renting (back to the topic of libraries) as well as copying and pasting on a computer that they want to see gone.
3
And they're seem to want to go further, not just censorship but purging wrong thinkers from the community and even using the distro. I can imagine soon they will demand a purity test will be required before you can download the ISO or just outright IP bans. OpenMandriva seems very tempting but there's quite a few hurdles - the AUR for packages not available elsewhere for one.
2
When they engage in mass censorship and banning, it means they have something to hide. If anything, that says far more than what being silent would have done.
2
@fakegeek5462 No. Genuinely serious. Websites are copyrighted work.
2
@JadedWarlock Who benefits from the destruction of all archives, physical libraries, second hand sales, loaning, renting, distribution of knowledge, ideas and information, mandation of DRM, turning media to a 'as a service' model. Hint - it begins with L but it isn't 'Lunduke' and the answer was given earlier in this thread.
2
If GNOME are going full on censorship on the foundation member getting kicked out in, that means there is something big behind it that the public needs to know. Keep digging.
2
@soundwaffles3092 Someone should point the server admin to Arch's Trademark Policy. It's likely they're going to face a bit of trouble if they are passing themselves off as official and not making people aware from the outset that they are unofficial.
2
I am in the centre of the political spectrum, maybe slightly left of centre and I detest these individuals who are pushing purity testing and political ideology into what should be meritocratic, apolitical and secular FOSS projects. The big difference between me and them is that I am libertarian while they are authoritarian. If this is allowed to fester and grow, it will be the end of FOSS. Get woke, go broke, as the saying goes.
2
By the arguments of their critics, physical libraries are also piracy on the basis that renting deprives a sale. Ultimately what they want is to paywall everything behind their own paywalls and charge for everything.
2
Because those webpage archives are also copyrighted and face the same issues as hosting books or music.
2
What critics are advocating for is mass digital book burning and the concentration of information, knowledge and media into the hands of a small number of conglomerates at our expense.
1
@kokyuusei Those who head up Arch Linux need to clarify their position pronto because the people in that community are acting as if they're the spokespeople for the distro and want things to escalate.
1
It'll be an ad-supported lower price subscription plan without co-pilot or a range of services and a premium ad-free subscription plan (and the only option for enterprises). Microsoft wants to move away from free.
1
Wait until every program requires a 365 subscription to be able to use it, including for Windows itself. Microsoft going forward wants everything paywalled knowing that most people who are not tech knowledgeable won't switch to Linux and Apple will follow suit by paywalling Mac.
1
Their ultimate goal is to have Windows as a service and convert every Windows user to an ongoing paying customer.
1
Their argument would be that the only legal way should be through DRM riddle content direct from the publisher, with them having full control of the media and you should be made to pay handsomely to read a copy with no ownership rights and where it can be pulled from you with little to no notice. It will paywall information, ideas and knowledge exclusively for the rich. Ultimately one of the big consequences of these lawsuits is the abolition of user generated content and where everything on the Internet is controlled behind paywalls by large conglomerates.
1
He didn't do that hand gesture. I watched the clip in full for context. He told the crowd that his heart goes out to them, put his hand to his chest and then moved his arm outward to metaphorically give his heart to them. For each side of the arena he was speaking to. There's no sinister motive here.
1
@meinviewer It's a violation of YouTube's Terms of Service to post "misinformation", specifically under its misinformation policies. it doesn't matter if you clarify it in the description or not, it still breaches the ToS by being uploaded.
1
From what I understand, Librewolf is not the only Firefox fork that has such attitudes and beliefs against the right. There's going to have to be an OpenMandriva style moment for web browsers where someone is going to have declare themselves non-partisan and anti identity politics.
1
@genero091 New licences, codes of conduct and agreements before you can download or install the project.
1
@Mackenway Enjoy paying massive amounts for a book when the publisher becomes the only game in town to view that media with you having no rights of ownership, it's riddled with DRM and you pay for it as a service.
1
Websites would argue that they have the same arguments as the book publishers, that the historical record of their website should be entirely within their control and that preservation is not fair use.
1
@nuvotion-live They don't sue, they lobby and they lobby to win.
1