zarenki

I had assumed their reasoning for not taking that approach might be related to metadata at rest, but it seems they don't use "zero access" encryption for metadata even at rest so I have no idea what technical justification they could have for not supporting IMAP with PGP handled by the email client. The fact that they restrict bridge access to paying subscribers only doesn't help them avoid lock-in impressions either.

I’m not sure if this is required. Any decent e-mail server uses TLS to communicate these days, so everything in transit is already encrypted.

In transit, yes, but not end-to-end.

One feature that Proton advertises: when you send an email from one Proton mail account to another Proton address, the message is automatically encrypted such that (assuming you trust their client-side code for webmail/bridge) Proton's servers never have access to the message contents for even a moment. When incoming mail hits Proton's SMTP server, Proton technically could (but claims not to) log the unencrypted message contents before encrypting it with the recipient's public key and storing it. That undermines Proton's promise of Proton not having access to your emails. If both parties involved in an email conversation agree to use PGP encryption then they could avoid that risk, and no mail server on either end would have access to anything more than metadata and the initial exchange of public keys, but most humans won't bother doing that key exchange and almost no automated mailers would.

Some standard way of automatically asking a mail server "Does user@proton.me have a PGP public key?" would help on this front as long as the server doesn't reject senders who ignore this feature and send SMTP/TLS as normal without PGP. This still requires trusting that the server doesn't give an incorrect public key but any suspicious behavior on this front would be very noticeable in a way that server-side logging would not be. Users who deem that unacceptable can still use a separate set of PGP keys.

They say the reason for needing their bridge is the encryption at rest, but I feel like the better way to handle wanting to push email privacy forward would be to publish (or better yet coordinate with other groups on drafting) a public standard that both clients and competing email servers could adopt for an email syncing protocol for that sort of zero-access encryption that requires users give their client a key file. A bridge would be easier to swallow as a fallback option until there's wider client support rather than as the only way.

A similar standard for server-to-server communication, like for automatic pgp key negotiation, would be nice too.

Still, Proton has a easy to access data export that doesn't require a bridge client or subscription or anything. I think that's required by GDPR. It's manual enough to not be an effective way to keep up-to-date backups in case you ever abruptly lose access but it's good enough to handle wanting to migrate to another provider.

Compared to simplelogin (or proton pass aliases, addy, firefox relay, etc), one other downside of a catchall is in associations across accounts. Registering with a @passmail.net address implies that I use Proton; registering with random-string@mydomain.org implies I have access to that domain. If 10 data breach leaks have exactly one account matching the latter pattern then that's a strong sign the domain isn't shared. If one breached site has my mailing address, my real identity can be tied to all the others.

Thanks for the recommendation. I'll give it a try sometime.

Stylus/handwriting oriented note taking. Stuff like Samsung Notes or Goodnotes (or OneNote, though it does a lot more) in the Android space, or e-ink options like Remarkable's stock software.

If I just want to use a keyboard for everything I have great FOSS options like Joplin and Standard Notes, but when I want to use a pen instead it feels like no other freedom-respecting option seem to even remotely approach the usability of just sticking with real ink and moleskine-like paper notebooks.

Even someone willing to pay an upfront fee for proprietary apps will struggle to find good options that allow syncing and reading (let alone editing) your notes on other devices/platforms without resorting to a monthly subscription.

The problem with those TV apps is DRM. All the major streaming services require that you either use a locked down platform (probably checking SafetyNet and more on Android TV) or settle for their browser UI which lacks dpad support and gets quality throttled to 1080p or lower.

Circumventing that DRM is possible, but no project at the scale of a platform like those would dare the both legal risk and support headache of making those circumventions (which are very liable to break) a core part of the OS.

Kodi (and distros using it like LibreELEC) exist for people who want a FOSS platform for using non DRM encumbered media with a TV remote interface.

Something I've noticed that is somewhat related but tangential to your problem: The result I've always gotten from using compose files is that container names and volume names get assigned names that contain a shared prefix by default. I don't use docker and instead prefer podman but I would expect both to behave the same on this front. For example, when I have a file at nextcloud/compose.yml that looks like this:

volumes:
  nextcloud:
  db:

services:
  db:
    image: docker.io/mariadb:10.6
    ...
  app:
    image: docker.io/nextcloud
    ...

I end up with volumes named nextcloud_nextcloud and nextcloud_db, with containers named nextcloud_db and nextcloud_app, as long as neither of those services overrides this behavior by specifying a container_name. I believe this prefix probably comes from the file-level name: if there is one and the parent directory's name otherwise.

The reasons I adjust my own compose files to be different from the image maintainer's recommendation include: to accommodate the differences between podman and docker, avoiding conflicts between the exported listen ports, any host filesystem paths I want to mount in the container, and my own preferences. The only conflict I've had with other containers there is the exported port. zigbee2mqtt, nextcloud, and freshrss all suggest using port 8080 so I had to change at least two of them in order to run all three.

Likely reversing a major anti-consumer decision is nice, even if it took seven years.

Knowing that consumer protections repeatedly flip back and forth every time the executive branch switches political party, and even then only if we're lucky, is not so reassuring. What's stopping it from being repealed again in a few years?

if the featureset is not clear enough at first glance

My experience as someone who has barely dabbled in Matrix, tried comparing clients, and knows a lot of people who stick to Discord: a lot of Discord users heavily use custom emotes, voice chat, and screen sharing. It's not even easy to figure out which Matrix clients support each of those features without installing everything and trying it out. There's a clients comparison on matrix.org that mentions Voip but not stickers or video.

For stickers alone:

• Element is widely considered the go-to Matrix client but uses a strange integration system for predefined sticker packs instead of the MSC2545 stickers that more closely resemble what users coming from Discord would want.
• Cinny seems to have the best support for stickers/emotes but its site doesn't mention them at all. It supports uploading and managing sticker packs at either a channel or user level, provides a nice picker UI to send any picture from those packs as either a large "sticker" or a small inline "emoji", and allows using them for reactions.
• FluffyChat mentions stickers on its site and has the second best sticker support, with all of those except reactions and a graphical sticker picker for inline emoji (need to type them as shortcode).
• SchildiChat, Nheko, and NeoChat have some sort of limited support for custom stickers/emoji. NeoChat is the only one of those that advertises stickers on its main site. Nheko mentions them in a GitHub readme.

Being able to freely use custom emotes without paying for a Discord Nitro subscription nor server boosts would be a great selling point but it's not something most users would be able to figure out before signing up. The limited client support isn't great; e.g. Fluffy is the only Android client that supports sending custom stickers but some people may dislike the chat bubbles style UI.

I have configured custom Android kernel builds to enable more USB drivers, enable module support, and tweak various other things. For one tangible example of the result: I could plug in a USB Wi-Fi adapter and use it to simultaneously connect to another Wi-Fi network with the internal NIC while also sharing my own AP over USB. On an Android device of all things. I have also adjusted kernel builds for SBCs (like Pi clones) to get things working at all.

I have never seen any reason to configure a custom kernel for my own desktop/laptop systems. Default builds for the distros I've used have been fine for me; if I'm ever dissatisfied with anything it's the version number rather than the defconfig. The RHEL/Rocky kernel omits a few features I want (like btrfs) but I'd rather stick to other distros on personal systems than tweak a distro that isn't even meant for tweaking.

I never had problems with Debian stable, especially on headless server. But it's not especially well-suited for brand new desktop hardware; even Ubuntu LTS and RHEL focus more on hardware enablement backports than Debian.

I've had a worse experience with Debian testing breaking my system with updates than Arch. Adding to that the freeze period (2012's was the worst, lasting 11 months) makes testing feel like the worst of both worlds between rolling and standard release distros.