I would respectfully disagree X has largely been stable while Xlibre has had a bunch of regressions which are not happening with X. That is not even addressing how toxic the Xlibre maintainers are.
It does not help that a lot of the accessibility features where contributed by Sun Microsystems which no longer exists so their is no big money companies paying to actively maintain the broken accessibility features in Linux.
I suspect a lot of that has to do with infighting with the adoption of new Wayland protocols since they seem more interested in winning arguments than they are solving real world issues for software developers who cannot code around the limitations with Wayland. I am hoping once X is shelved that will put pressure on the Wayland protocol developers to address these shortcomings.
The issue is GNOME has removed all legacy X support starting on GNOME 50 which is forcing Canonical to have to remove X support earlier than they had planned. So unless Zorin OS is either planning on replacing the packed GNOME 50 with an older version or forking it X Org support will be gone in Zorin OS 19.
1 Like
I agree I do not see Zorin OS leaving the Ubuntu base they use to make their own customized Linux distribution since they seem okay allowing SNAPS in their product along with users having the ability to install SNAPS in the software store. I do however see Linux Mint eventually leaving Ubuntu completely since they seem to have a hard stance against SNAP and have largely disabled it all in their distributions.
Quite frankly it depends on how the AI is implemented. If it stays local on my Linux operating system I have no issue with that but if it is very invasive constantly phoning home to Canonical I would then have an issue.
From what I learned a long time ago, Sun Microsystems were not behind Orca. It just so happened that a Sun Microsystems employee who had a vision impairment wrote the program Orca. I understand Sun Microsystems had a section (APO) for Accessibility development, but this was subsumed by Gnome's release of GTK3.99 where all Accessibility items are/were to be embedded:
My only issue with Mint is it feels outdated and misses auto light/dark mode that changes based on sunrise/sunset at your current location.
But Security also needs to be balanced with usability which is a problem since applications like Kicad are unusable in Wayland due to all the restrictions/missing functionality on Wayland that cannot be coded around.
1 Like
Well the VM runs O.K. in live mode but the installer to create a virtual-drive crashes!
But it is a very new OS and the third Alpha release was just today!
Comes with Brave Origin which I rather it didn't - I prefer LibreWolf.
One thing that gets swept to the side too frequently when discussing security is the Path To a Security Threat.
For example, when talking about a compromised X-server, where proponents of Wayland argue that Wayland is more secure than X-windowing because Wayland isolates windowed applications; it is not discussed that in order to compromise X-server, a malicious actor needs to have already gained Local Access.
This is a very important detail and it adds a heavy perspective on security.
If malicious code is already executing as your user, it could also read your ~/.ssh keys, your browser's saved passwords/cookie store, your shell history, etc. Accessing windowing privileges is just another one of those things it could do.
To put perspective on this: I could make a strong argument that your computer is insecure because your screen displays highly sensitive information openly, without it restricting access by turning itself off if an underprivileged person walks in and views your screen.
You could agree that an A.I. Monitor equipped with facial recognition that dims the screen when it sees an unauthorized person is "more secure" and also agree that pushing that on the average home user is absurd.
What is actually being exploited here is users uncertainty and fear; as a means of pushing a different protocol.
Technically, a person can claim that Wayland is "inherently more secure" than "Xorg". This technicality depends on Xorg being already hacked and compromised and Wayland is just as susceptible to this. If a local malicious actor can access the above, then it also can access ~/.ssh keys, browser saved passwords, shell history... Which are more useful than your windowing. To get access to Windowing, they must already have access to your user account, bare minimum.
And both require a local actor accessing your machine, with your password and user account. Which means that on Wayland, they can hack its sole and only pipeline and gain access to the Kernel.
This is critical.
And it highlights That in that regard; Xorg is more secure with the kernel than Wayland.
Arguing about the security of Wayland and X-Windowing is a circular argument that cannot, by its nature, ever lead to a meaningful conclusion.
It is not about security - it is about Control Over the End User. That is where our focus should be.
This is a very interesting statement, so I have searched. Combed through public mailing lists... And I cannot find anything that includes mention of a police report, much less one being given to a Code of Conduct Committee.
Now, it is true that XLibre founder Enrico Weigelt was banned from freedesktop(dot)org/X.Org when the fork was announced, by the Code of Conduct Committee. Though the committee never publicly stated what specifically triggered it.
I did find one source where some random forum poster claimed the existence of a police report, but offers no evidence at all and since I cannot find evidence of any police reports, that sounds like something that user made up.
Artix announced it had switched back to Xorg because of the high number of XLibre-related bug reports. Reading into this, I can see the case but... the backlash resulted in a veteran Artix developer, Artist, being targeted and harassed, leading to that developer's resignation.
What I observe and read the most in the mailing lists and in the public comments that surround Xlibre is guilt on both sides of drama. Exaggerations, unnecessary accusations, meritless claims, heavily political ideology being deployed... The biggest mess is not in the code. It is in the hate filled rage baiting that surrounds it.
We are not going to do that, here.
Here, we can discuss the merit of ideas. The actual results of code, the actual security models. But not anything in regards to persons, personal choices, or the intelligence of those involved.
4 Likes
They already declared their Position in some Posts:
That is a bit vague. So, more details will brighten it more. But especially on the first Post the Part of explicit vs. implicit AI concerns me. And in the 2nd Post is mentioned that there will not be a Kill Switch.
I personally don't wan't AI. It is painful enough for me to have it in Firefox (even when disabled and blocked). But in the actual OS? No, thank You.
1 Like
A bit of topic, but I find it odd in Star Trek:Tht Next Genaration, the B.O.R.G. came from a human satalike flung into space. The comic book, had more about them, I thought the show didn't have enough. Like a season or movie Orgin of the B.O.R.G.
happened to me too. i submitted feedback and Brian is fixing the issue. was able to repair my install and so far so good. even managed till get my scanner working.
1 Like