elkien

joined 5 months ago
[–] elkien@lemmy.today 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No it hasn't, but with the Proton Mail Bridge you can get close, as it creates a local IMAP server that you can use with any email client - it's far from ideal though and it has plenty of glitches

[–] elkien@lemmy.today 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

th has Canonical to do with the UK? They are from South África, not the UK

[–] elkien@lemmy.today 3 points 4 months ago

Plenty of complex things have been written in fad languages. And not only complex things, COBOL was one of the biggest fad languages of all time.

 

I've been a ProtonMail user for 6 years already but must admit that I'm one of those that is not liking the direction the company is taking and find it worrying, specially now that they plan to launch an office suite that I don't need or want.

I run most of my cloud services self-hosted except email but I'm not fully ready (hardware & software - wise) to admin my own encrypted email server although I don't discard I'll do so in the future. I already know Tuta and it's defo another option but my ideal one should be one that could be used directly with email clients like Thunderbird (I don't mind managing my own GPG keys) so I see Tuta as the retreat option.

So, any ideas for a reliable encrypted email provider other than self-hosting?

[–] elkien@lemmy.today 5 points 5 months ago

I've always seen as that as a scapehatch for one of the most typical issues with ORMs, like the the N+1 problem, but I never fully bought it as a real solution.

Mainly because in large projects this gets abused (turns out none or little of the SQL has a companion test) and one of the most oversold benefits of ORMs (the possibility of "easily" refactor the model) goes away.

Since SQL is code and should be tested like any other code, I rather ditch the whole ORM thing and go SQL from the beginning. It may be annoying for simple queries but induces better habits.

[–] elkien@lemmy.today 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

If the rise of techno-lords of this neo-feudalist era hasn't made it clear to people why privacy is important then it isn't even worth having the conversation with those people anyway. Privacy is an spectrum and 100% privacy is extremelly difficult to achieve and potentially not worth pursuing to the average people unless your life or someone else's you love is under threat.

But while 100% is not worth it to the average people, getting very close to it isn't super difficult nowadays granting you have or know someone with the technological knowledge to achieve it: Nowadays you can use Firefox with proper adblocker extensions for free, get a phone that is de-googled out of the box, you can switch social networks from centralised ones to federated ones, self-host a lot of cloud services very cheaply, etc. True that some technical knowledge (and time) is required to achieve a decent level of privacy. Finding the time isn't that difficult if one cares a little (they are one online search away), the technical bit is the hard one and maybe a good reason for those of us that self-host to start federating more and more services (but this is another conversation). The fact is, who nowadays doesn't care about privacy is because they have chosen to do so.

So if the conversation even arises, I sometimes flip it by pointing out how shitty their preferred online service (or even operating system) has become in the recent years, just to tell them I have a totally different online experience than them. If they are curious I can show them how, if not, then they shouldn't care about me as it's obvious they don't care about themselves in the first place.