You can just move it after. .local is different from local so there is no clash.

Why? What advantage is there for Windows to do this?

Of course it would, for it already did. It might not be as polished, and there would be more issues with hardware, but it would certainly still exist, and even thrive. Because enough people want it and can put in the manpower to create it.

> but there's really no possibility a social media platform (or the internet at-large) could adopt a similar strategy.

By decentralizing it could.

> Hosting is expensive

Decentralizing would work around that.

> Blind authoritarianism is ironically one of it's strongest defenses.

The strongest defense is GPL, because if a company tried to do that then the same thing that happened with nginx would happen.

> The decentralized internet, the blockchain, the darkweb and I2P all need someone to pay for hosting costs.

With a properly designed protocol these costs would be neglibile.

Yup. I was just referencing wanting to obtain keys from the TPM to decrypt a partition. This is useful for me to have the following setup:

- Laptop turned on, no keys pressed, boots into super locked down guest OS.

- Laptop turned on, certain key pressed within 2 seconds, boot into 'hidden' OS.

- In both cases, HDD is encrypted, decrypted automatically via retrieving keys stored in the TPM. This means the harddrive cannot be read outside of that particular laptop, unless keys are extracted from the TPM.

- Bootloader signed with own key, any and all existing keys wiped, so laptop cannot be booted with any external OS.

How would I recreate that setup with nmbl?

That's a good link by the way, thanks - saved.

I love that we have pretty powerful laptops with 20 hours of battery that only weigh a pound or so. I remember 20 years ago lugging around a 2kh brick with only 2 hours of battery.

I do think UBI should be a minimum, and people should still receive compensation for work they produce that people enjoy. Just not exclusive rights and perpetual royalties and all this nonsense.

Why does a comment saying maybe the government shouldn't have that power not make sense in this context?

I would think most people reading it understand it just fine but don't have a reason to leave a comment.

Honestly, I think it was clear. What's your next best guess after the other users'?

> The Decentralized Internet already exists

In a very alpha stage version, sure. It's currently fragmented, unstable, slow, has limited services and can still be interfered with.

I want something significantly closer to the 'normal' internet, but with a greater capacity for redundancy, privacy and anonymity. This is absolutely possible, inevitable even, but also quite a long ways away.

Linux is a pretty good example of that not happening. Just one particular instance.

Not at all what I was suggesting. Not even close.

Because I've seen this claim many times over more than a decade, and have seen evidence multiple times. I've also been able to search for it when I was curious and find it without issue.

Here's the first search result, a Vice article from 2018: https://www.vice.com/en/article/evkmz7/study-again-shows-pir...

I think they shouldn't be attached to that old business model in a world where self-publishing is possible.

I also think generous UBI should exist, but I guess that's another issue.

Probably not technical. There is another element, obtaining a HDD encryption key from the TPM. The idea that the HDD is encrypted outside of my laptop and nothing can boot on my laptop that isn't my signed OS to read it.

Thinking about it I probably could do everything in the kernel directly - why not? Well, because it would be extra work to write all that, but probably not a technical limitation.