I worked at a university in the IT area. The influence of the Big 4 was visible, with corporate coloured decisions being made that favoured large companies over internal capabilities.

The outcome was already predetermined when the legislation was passed, and the report is being written with that in mind. The report basically has to push it forwards. If this had been done by the ALRC it would have looked quite different.

Your work computer likely contains personally identifiable information. Microsoft very likely has a significant profile on what you do at work and could conceivably link that to your other identities outside of work.

Are they actually doing that? It’s hard to say. Microsoft does have relationships with data brokers like Snowflake Inc. and SCUBA plus its own internal capabilities like Xandr Inc.

Cross pollination is more than possible when employees use personsal devices to login to work accounts. Most of the people that I work with login to Slack on their personal device using Microsoft Entra SSO.

My previous job, yes! A few people had that fight years before I started and won. It was decided on the basis that we’re Linux sysadmins who already operate a sizeable fleet of Linux systems and running our own desktops would be beneficial and self-supported.

Sadly my current employer doesn’t share this view. We used a crippled Linux desktop through Apache Guacamole which is a bit average to say the least. I have to put up with the constant bullshit that is Windows and all of its ads, news headlines and trash that I don’t want on my computer at work. I hate it but I have very little influence in that space.

Will Signal block Australian IP addresses, or nix accounts that have a +61 phone number? I’d assume the former but if Signal and other social media platforms go for the latter it will be painful for Australian netizens.

yggmail specifically, probably not. yggdrasil uses TCP/IP and the Meshtastic latencies to perform connections would be too high AFAIK. It would probably only work in a fairly well-connected network. yggdrasil could be used directly over a WiFi protocol but it would need fairly good reception to function.

N.B. I haven’texperimented with this myself.

yggmail is a fairly obscure and experimental take on email on a mesh network: https://github.com/neilalexander/yggmail

https://forums.debian.net/ exists for Debian

Graphene shills have been banging on this point for donkey’s ages. Reality is that many people use phones that are out of OEM support and many OEM ROMs are bundled with questionable software (Oppo, Samsung etc.) There are some decent criticisms to be made about LineageOS, but others to be made about Grapheme, like its Google-suggestive configurations, which is quite bad for security and privacy. Graphene says this is all optional and not part of the OS, but doesn’t include any equivalent F-Droid installer.

My original reply to the OP’s question, thoughts and experiences with GrapheneOS, was along the lines of “I think GrapheneOS is Google-centric” and you disagreed saying that GrapheneOS was a “blank slate”. Honestly I think you’re being a bit defensive and maybe a little gaslighty which is why I downvoted.

GrapheneOS provides fairly prominent links to a Google Play installer or the relatively obscure Aurora Store. The Aurora Store client app is FOSS but the store is quite literally a proxy for the Google Play Store. The apps in the screenshots on Ausora Store’s homepage are mostly apps that use or require Google Play Services. This is all very Google-centric.

If Google Play wasn’t an important part of GrapheneOS, it could just not contain a prominent link to the Google Play installer. Or it could contain a link to install a fairly prominent app store that offers an ecosystem outside of Google Play. But it exclusively steers users to the Google Play ecosystem as a part of the default, packaged experience, hence my original reply to the OP.

But it is Google Play-centric. There is an option to install Google Play. There is not an option to install other app stores like F-Droid, unlike some of the other AOSP clones.

Screenshot for you. Google is explicitly linked to for easy setup. F-Droid is not. “There is nothing” is simply disingenuous.

I use GrapheneOS but I don’t like how Google Play-centric it is. It is geared towards people installing their “normal” apps with the GrapheneOS special sauce sandboxing. No F-Droid by default where all of the FOSS apps are.

Even with a 10% pay cut the VC will be remunerated over $1,000,000 per year, even despite the university’s poor financial performance.

Having worked at a university the waste is in plain sight. Vendor lock-in, consulting fees (especially with the Big 4), high executive pay, and compartmentalisation between professional and academic staff are high on the list.

In my area (different university) there was a constant stream of poor decision making. Moving to the cloud? Let’s hire a consultant to tell us what to do, and then do it in the worst possible way, instead of using internal capabilities! I suggested that the contract include provisions for “best practice” as listed by the vendor (HashiCorp) but this was ignored. The consultant gave us spaghetti Terraform code and an inefficient, high cost subscription layout.

The professional and academic staff barely talk in my experience. Academics do their own thing as much as possible. Professional staff throw solutions over the wall, mostly because of the existence of the wall in the first place.

The university was looking at using “crotch sensors” (motion sensors under the desk) to measure desk utilisation, spending money on “smart” ambient sound solutions etc. in the executive building, and other high cost solutions looking for a problem, at the same time as freezing staff and threatening redundancies. I was denied training but offered access to an LLM subscription (GitHub CoPilot) along with other IT staff, because AI is the going buzzword being parroted by the executives.

The higher education sector seriously needs an external review… and a proverbial kick up the bum.

I sold my car last year and barely gave it a secomd thought (I still have access to a car on weekends). Money, environment and space-saving were all factors.

I don’t think government should be in the business of subsidising driving (which is currently the case in multiple ways). Instead that money should be used to make public and active transport safe, convenient and reliable.

Here’s the actual paper of the technology (Prio) that it’s based on.

Some problems stand out:

• It requires that the organisations (Mozilla and ISRG) not collude to decrypt the secret share (probably reasonable)
• The paper suggests registering end users to protect against Sybil attacks.
• The scheme requires the organisations to correctly withhold results from advertisers until there are sufficient results.

I’m not overly familiar with the tech stack but I’d be concerned about browsers using a persistent UUID to send impressions to Mozilla’s API.

The biggest elephant in the room is that seemingly nobody wants the damn thing. It offers nothing to users, except maybe a good feeling inside that they’re supporting AdTech. It offers AdTech less than the current deal where they can collect obscene amounts of personal information for targeted advertising.

PSA: if your financial institution/government/<other website> is using SMS codes (aka PSTN MFA) for multi-factor authentication they are practically worthless against a determined attacker who can use SIM swap or an SS7 attack to obtain the code. Basically you are secured by a single factor, your password. If your password is compromised it may be sold via black hat marketplaces and purchased by an attacker who would then likely attempt to break that second factor.

The best way to protect yourself is to use a unique password; a password manager especially helps with this. Sometimes institutions will offer “Authenticator” (TOTP) as a second factor, or PassKey authentication, both secure alternatives to SMS codes.

Here in Aus I’m working with Electronic Frontiers Australia to try and force some change within government and financial institutions (via the financial regulator). Most banks here use SMS codes and occasionally offer a proprietary app. One of the well-known international banks, ING Bank, even uses a 4 pin code to login to their online banking portal. 😖

Unfortunately SMS codes are a legacy left from old technology and a lack of understanding or resourcing by organisations that implement it. Authenticator/TOTP tokens have been around for 16 years (and standardised for 13 years), and PassKeys are relatively newer. There is a learning curve but at the very least every organisation should at least provide either TOTP or PassKeys as an option for security-minded users.

I have a bicycle crate in my rear rack (40L from memory). I can just throw my backpack and/or shopping in there and be on my way. No issues transporting when empty. I avoid riding in the rain but I guess a waterproof bag would help for that. It’s durable, the main concern is the rear rack. I had to replace the cheaper rack that I bought last year after the welding snapped in a few places over time (I had it held together with duct tape for a while). My new rack should be much more sturdy this time around.

I have access to borrow a car which I do every few weeks so I don’t need to over engineer my bike setup too much.

Yeah 100% agree. I put in a submission to the joint select committee on social media a while back saying as much. The concept has Meta, X, Microsoft, Google and the big players in mind. Even if it is just the big players it’ll have unintended consequences, privacy being the main one. Digital ID providers, public or private, not using standards and only supporting Google Play and Apple App Store is a big issue.

I personally don’t care about the concept of the eSafety Commissioner that much. I think the idea of a government body that looks at cyberbullying cases is possibly misguided (way too high up) but I’m not overly concerned with that aspect. Julie Inman Grant is ex-Microsoft and ex-Adobe, two organisations which are pretty hostile to users’ rights. She is constantly requesting more powers to solve an unsolvable problem. There are massive problems with X and Meta, but some of the solutions she puts forward are just draconian like mandatory ID and client-side scanning. Their strategy page is a thinly veiled pro-big tech piece talking about concerns about potential lack of authority in decentralised computing.

Yeah, eKaren is really not far off the mark as far as name calling goes.

On one hand, the hate that’s being directed to the e-Safety commish is disgraceful.

On the other hand she is effectively proposing an internet licence for all Australians to be able to interact online via mandatory age verification. It applies to all social media sites but the definition of social media is so vague it basically just says a digital service which can be used to communicate with other people. She is deserving of our scrutiny.

https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Social_Media/SocialMedia/Terms_of_Reference