Yeah, why not? I’ll go ahead and make that suggestion.

What? Do you understand what I’m asking? Do you understand what you’re suggesting?

I mean, the terminal allows them to ctrl-c, ctrl-v a simple solution developed by someone else, even if that someone else didn’t bother to build out a GUI for applying their changes.

So googling how to do someone, copy/pasting command is better than finding it in GUI? How high are you?

The convoluted steps they would have to take to achieve the same effect with a GUI would seriously hinder the GUI-only user.

Again a solved problem, just make a decent GUI for your application.

Are you suggesting users with no programming experience can simply add the flags they need to a terminal application but would be unable to do the same with a GUI because the GUI is the barrier? Not the logic and that the program will do with the flag, but the GUI is the barrier?

What are you saying?

That assumes the programmer bothered to make user friendly flags… The terminal doesn’t magically just work.

That’s a bad take. Learning the bad habit of copy/pasting command and depending on the Internet to do the most basic changes to your computer is not a “feature” of the terminal. I can Google how to navigate Windows control center too.

Setting search is a solved problem, you simply search for the setting name in the UI, it’s way easier than navigating terminal flags and switches.

It is. It’s just… how do you know you’re actually talking to the fingerprint sensor and not a fake one that’s been plugged in?

Think of it like a locked mailbox: the fingerprint sensor might securely match the fingerprint and only unlock if it’s correct—but if anyone can swap out the mailbox with their own lookalike, and the OS just blindly accepts the “unlocked” signal, the whole security model breaks. Without an attestation mechanism (like SDCP on Windows or secure enclave-backed verification), the OS can’t prove it’s getting input from trusted hardware. Match-on-chip helps, but it’s not enough unless the result is cryptographically signed by the sensor and validated by the OS through a trusted, authenticated channel.

That’s the gap in Linux: there’s no widely adopted standard for verifying that trust path end-to-end.

It’s not hard to find out what’s being pirated, BitTorrent isn’t private.

I was hoping to find an answer the original question in this dialog.

No, they said they “ruled out” privacy for “obvious reasons”.

Obviously mockable statement.

Can you clarify? I’m just getting back into Linux this year, what makes it more centralized than any other repo based packaging solution? How is using Ubuntu’s deb repos on a thousand distros less centralized than flathub?

Walmart is the only self checkout that constantly accuses me of stealing.