Yeah I would also want that but a radio network without sector and base station sectioning but it is unfeasible. Frequency spectrum is limited and scarce, sectoring is used in order to share the same frequencies between neighboring base stations. Thus a rough positioning is intrinsic on the system.

Completely anonymous radio link requires a unique radio " address " for each terminal. This is not possible because you need multiple base stations in order to cover big areas, thus you need multiple limited frequencies.

WiFi is a good example. It’s concept is very similar to cellular networks but in small scale (well or it was designed for small scale). WiFi access points suppose they have a more or less clear frequency (from other WiFi stations), with that in consideration they can search for any device that responds for a given address.

But notice that in the modern days new WiFi standards have come up. This is because now we have tons of WiFi AP per building, per house, the freq band is limited too. Modern WiFi implementations are copying the cellular designs with OFDMA. They are starting to use sectoring and MIMO techniques in order to separate the WiFi coverage in sectors.

From a telecommunications point of view cellular networks are better and more efficient that legacy WiFi implementations.

The problem is that because of this some knowledge about the positioning of the terminal can be known. But so do it with modern WiFi.

Again the problem is not the technology but how we use it. Do we have laws that respect user privacy? Nowadays you can geolocate someone by their IP because most ISP nodes are gelocated in order to map network shortages.

Tracking does not depend on you after all. Any station to which you are connected knows you are near them and since most stations.know where they are they also rougly know where are you.

The problem resides in the way we protect our data. Should users be linked to terminals? Well always that you identify yourself from a terminal you are somehow telling that you ARE that terminal.

The problem here is trying to separate the user part from the rest. We must focus on techniques that allow a user to identify themselves in an a remote service without linking it to its real terminal. Tor does that in a way by separating layer by layer.

Is a complex deal. Just be aware of this issues and try to not be fooled by the WiFi VoIP is the new thing super mega privacy. Because when you think you are safe is when you get stabbed in the back.

Mull from divestos repo works fine! Use FFupdater to install it or link the fdroid repo to your fdroid

5 painful seconds

This VoIP vs cellular doesn’t have sense. Cellular networks are only link layer. They stablish low level telecom techniques to be able to transport any data to a cellular mobile belonging to the cellular net. The main difference with other link layer aproaches like wifi, ethernet, bluetooth, etc. Is that terminals are linked to a net of base stations in order to keep the best connection to the net at all times from every posible place. In order to do that each base station needs to know which terminals (phone numbers) are in his vicinity and in which sector. This way the cellular network knows where to look for when searching for a given terminal.

VoIP is an application layer service. Which means you can use VoIP over link layers like bluetooth, wifi, ethernet, cellular network. There’s no VoIP vs cellular network. Cellular network can carry VoIP data because cellular network can carry IP datagrams. All modern cellular network use VoIP as their way to carry the voice information over the net and to maintain connection.

Wifi calling vs VoIP also makes no sense. You can do VoIP on wifi. Wifi is a link layer it can carry any digital data encapsulated.

What I understand you are saying is using VoIP through Wifi instead of using VoIP over cellular network.

In order to help a bit more, this are some.VoIP services:

Discord. Linephone Skype. Mumble.

Wait linux community is removing maintainters because of their nationality???!!

There’s a CH34A fix. I had a lot of problems with the cables that come with the CH34A.

In any case you should always refer to this.

Why not something xmpp based? Or matrix

Devs should use crossplatform engines. No C# based crap.

Nice one more libre software protected!

I come from Debian stable so…

I’m currently ending the Guix manual. I want to add freetube and N64recompiled packages. Didn’t know it’s difficult to get patches or packages update to mainstream.

It’s a bit funny that the records that Guix uses are not the baseline records of the Guile api but modified ones. And the documentation in some low-level regards is scarce.

But using Guix opens up endless options and more importantly it helps you manage and learn how to setup operating systems.

Guix System. The way that this distro keeps track of changes of the distro itself. The concept of having a store where everything you build is stored there with write protection. The fact that you can configure not only the system but every home environment to every detail but without having to deal with various configuration files that you keep track of it.

The fact that all builds are bit by bit reproducible. The extensibility you have in your system.

It’s the first distro I feel that nothing in your own OS instance is tied to any distro decisions.

The fact that you can have multiple versions of the same library without breaking the system.

It has a lot of things that I never thought it could be possible with a distro without going crazy about creating a very messy configuration.

You could try Guix (either standalone or Guix system). You can have a immutable profile, an immutable home environment with centralized configuration and much more!

The ability of having immutable environment and dotfile configurations is amazing.

Free Software*

Vscode is malware

Shepard? Do you mean Shepherd?

You should probably check out Guile.

Damn who imagined that gaming would be the topic that made the FOSS OSes relevant. I don’t agree on all that steam does but, they really nail it with the Steam deck and Steam Os.

A lot of people have steam deck and it helps realize that GNU/Linux is an amazing OS.

On the other hand Microsoft and Apple are doing their best to try to give more reasons to switch.

Lunix kernel? That’s new.

BSD licence allowed to work with the AT&T licence which at the end generated all the drama. Unix wars.

Again BSD is great if you don’t care about what will happen with your code.

Yeah the Android point doesn’t have any sense, that’s right.

Apple shares the code of the parts they want. Since it’s not a copyleft licence, then they can still ship you a version of Darwin + privative code as your macOs without sharing the entire code. So you end running kind of Frankenstein program with parts you don’t know what they do.

AOSP is not a great licence because it allows Google benefit from contributions, but then it has tons of privative software on top. So basically contributing to the AOSP means that you improve the code that later it’s used in combination with privative one.

My point is that libre source code should enforce that derivations of it stay libre. Otherwise you are working for free for companies that don’t care about the users.

Hey for companies is a good point. The best system for them is open source. It makes sense for them to use it. And open source is much better than just privative.

From the point of view of the individual user and developer is not that great. It kind of hooks you in because it has open source parts, but you are probably unaware of all the closed source stuff that runs in combination with it.

I get the open source point, but I don’t find it fair at the long term for the individual developer and user.

Over the years I’ve become convinced that the BSD license is great for code you don’t care about. I’ll use it myself. If there’s a library routine that I just want to say ‘hey, this is useful to anybody and I’m not going to maintain this,’ I’ll put it under the BSD license.

Linus Torvals at LinuxCon 2016

GNU Hurd didn’t take a good path of development following MACH design. But I still think GNU Hurd is the kernel of the future. Probably the Next generation Hurd. Just because GNU MACH and Hurd present very convoluted designs.

A kernel that performs most of their activities in user space and that it is truly modular looks very promising for the kind of systems we have nowadays and in the future.

Someone has to make the change, or we will stagnate in cumbersome and up featured systems.