• 0 Posts
  • 64 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 4th, 2023

help-circle
  • It’s a bit different because of the stated values though.

    Raspberry pi’s foundation is focused on making computers available broadly, while this new organization is focused on making privacy widely accessible.

    While both can be commercialized, the pi’s foundation has no fundamental problems with selling out privacy or focusing on money to achieve those goals. Proton would have a much harder time arguing that profiting from sale.of private data supports privacy.

    This is relevant because it means even if the remaining shares end up on the stock market, the foundation can use its majority ownership to veto any privacy concerns.

    Time will tell. I could also have missed something


  • A company with a public offering basically cannot refuse a large enough buyout because with a public offering comes a financial responsibility to the shareholders. Public stock is a contract saying give me money and I’ll do my best to make you money back, and it’s very legally binding.

    You can avoid this by never going public, but that also means you basically don’t get big investors for expanding what you can offer. A public offering involves losing some of your rights as owner for cash.

    When the legal goal becomes “money above all else”, it is hard to justify NOT selling all the data and violating the trust of your customers for money, customer loyalty has to be monetizable and also worth more.

    Proton has given a majority share to a nonprofit with a legal requirement to uphold the current values, not make money. This means that the remaining ownership can be sold to whoever, the only way anything gets done is if this foundation agrees. It prevents everything associated with a legal financial responsibility to make money, but still allows the business to do business things and make money, which seems to be proton’s founder’s belief, that the software should be sold to be sustainable.


  • Seems solid.

    It doesn’t change a ton, but the point was basically them putting their money where their mouth is and saying “now we can’t sell out like everything else.”

    If you liked them before, this is great. It means google or whoever literally can’t buy them out, it’s not about the money. If you were iffy already because they’re not FOSS or whatever other reason, this doesn’t change that, either, for better or worse



  • If the security camera has alerts like a decent baby monitor, then I see no need to change.

    If you already intend to have security cameras, being able to have one that works as a baby monitor but is completely integrated into a real security system just seems like the best of both worlds.

    If you currently use the camera to spot check your baby, with no real alert system for issues, then I’d jump straight to a security system that’s capable of that to reduce price over time.

    I had a security camera with a built in mic, a cheaper one, and besides getting some false positives, it worked perfectly until my kid didn’t need one anymore. I got an alert on their app when it detected sound and I opened the camera, it wasn’t straight audio, but all I needed was a notification to check it myself.












  • Encyclopedia is “general education”, referring to its broad scope. Wikipedia added wiki as a reference to the source, so the best one would be {source}pedia.

    Fedepedia isn’t awful but feels… bland, in my opinion.

    Something like consolidate is a good synonym for it, but consolipedia also doesn’t feel right to me, so if we’re not referring to the federated part, we’d have to refer to the decentralized part. Decentropedia is fairly decent, but I’m fond of Micropedia, because the root word is very common, and I feel it’s catchier than decentropedia. Either of those are good though.