lckdscl [they/them]

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

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

help-circle








  • I didn’t have ads either but being able to use KoReader is a good enough motivation for me.

    • You can customize it a lot to your own liking and they do something clever with page changing that it seems a lot more responsive.
    • Another thing is I used to have to convert epubs to KFX to get nice hyphenation and good typography but on KoReader you seem to be able to customize all those typography things with whatever epub you throw at it.
    • Also, I have a local Calibre OPDS endpoint, you can add that in KoReader and download books over wirelessly. WiFi needs to be on when doing that but with a few tweaks you have read only root partiton so Kindle shouldn’t update.

    Overall there are a lot of steps to it, if you’re comfortable with your current setup it’s not worth the hassle/time.






  • 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.