Libraries

506 readers

1 users here now

For talk of all things related to libraries!

Please follow this instances rules.

To find more communities on this instance, go to: !411@literature.cafe

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

gabe

Discovered a library with CAT5 ethernet ports -- how common is this? (sopuli.xyz)

submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by freedomPusher@sopuli.xyz to c/libraries

18 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I noticed a library that has ethernet ports, which I must say is quite impressive. So many libraries strictly expect people to use wifi which has downsides:

many (most?) wifi NICs have no FOSS drivers (ethernet is actually the only way I can get my FOSS laptop online)
ethernet is faster and consumes less energy
wifi radiation harms bees and other insects according to ~72 studies (update: separate discussion thread here which shows the research is heavily contested)
apparently due to risk of surrounding households consuming bandwidth, 2FA is used (which is inadvertently exclusive at some libraries)
enabling wifi on your device exposes you to snooping by other people’s iPhones and Androids according to research at University of Hamburg. Every iPhone in range of your device is collecting data about you and sending it to Apple (e.g. SSIDs your device previously connected to). From what I recall about this study, it does not happen at the network level, so ethernet devices attached to the same network would not be snooped on (and certainly SSID searches would not be in play).
(edit) users at risk to AP spoofing (thanks @NoneYa@lemm.ee for pointing this out)

I don’t know when (if ever) I encountered a library with ethernet. Is this a dying practice and I found an old library, or a trending practice by well informed forward-thinking libraries?

BTW, the library that excludes some people from wifi by imposing mobile phone 2FA is not the same library that has ethernet ports, unfortunately. If you can’t use the wifi of the SMS 2FA library then your only option is to use their Windows PCs.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] freedomPusher@sopuli.xyz 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

So everyone is stupid trying to run lemmy the way they can

Some people are more skilled than others. Skilled admins know how to avoid CF. Skilled users know how to find instances that are run by skilled admins (non-CF). Unwise users give up something for nothing and needlessly trust and empower a demonstrably abusive tech giant.

Because privacy is more important on a public forum than fighting the bots.

Of course. Privacy is about control not just security. Those bots CF fights are beneficial. The fight against beneficial bots has collateral damage on humans caught in the cross-fire, evidenced by countless discriminatory CAPTCHAs, driven by some protectionist asshole who doesn’t want their data scraped. The fight against bots is harmful to human users; not just because of the discrimination against blind people but also because we lose the benefits that beneficial bots bring us.

But someone for some reason should give you a server for free. … So you won’t contribute, won’t help just nag about everything. ok.

Of course. Money isn’t free. Your expectation that a developer not only contribute labor to the commons but also spend their own money is a perversely absurd demonstration of self-entitlement. If you want a tor version make it yourself and use the high-speed connection you already have to test with.

But you CAN solve the issues of lemmy because you CAN fork it, but you won’t.

Fork it for what purpose? Adding Tor support is useless on a capped uplink.

You trust some random guy from Finland more than everyone else,

Citation needed. I’ll trust any random person more than Cloudflare because CF has proven to be untrustworthy.