Shills or no shills, using Debian does not reduce your reliance on Red Hat software all that much
Maybe, but if, based on one loud mouth in a Lemmy thread I began a whole intensive programme of de-redhatting my life, that would be a bit dumb ;-)
But veering a little more away from using Redhat or Fedora, seems a proportionate response to finally feeling there really is bad faith shilling and genuine red flags. My inflammatory language was perhaps just an emotional expression of that.
Does your distro use systemd? ... If so, Red Hat has a lot of influence on the evolution of your distro
And that was part of the controversy, wasn't it? And part of why, if vague memory serves, Debian resisted it at first. Perhaps your comment vindicates them!
I also think not being idiotic means acknowledging facts.
Normally I sit back from this sort of drama: there are certainly bad actors and bad attitudes in various places, but in the end, for most purposes, it's just another distribution?
But one commenter here, by looking so strongly like an idiotic shill, has now turned me against RH and Fedora. Hopefully the sour taste will fade soon and I'll forget, but for now: Use Debian-based or Arch-based, people! Or SUSE! (I know they had their controversial moment, but AFAIK all is forgiven.) Or another! But keep control and consolidation out of Red's hat.
Alt text: In the 60s, Marvin Minsky assigned a couple of undergrads to spend the summer programming a computer to use a camera to identify objects in a scene. He figured they'd have the problem solved by the end of the summer. Half a century later, we're still working on it.
Edit: seems I'm the third person to comment this! :')
It's tricky. Part of the problem, I think, is if you do have corruption and carelessness in something like the FDA, there's no amount of careful reporting that can fix it - it becomes propaganda.
It's necessary to address the problems, though I still agree with being careful about what information is broadcast and how - but it's necessary to keep information open and challenge things otherwise you end up worse down the line. A measles epidemic is bad. But imagine if you suppressed thalidomide results and other failures, allowing things to get worse and worse in the name of not damaging people's trust, then eventually (after years of covered-up harm) it all comes out and people abandon scientific medicine altogether!
You don't have to imagine... I'm sure a large component of both vaccine skepticism and Trump's presidency have come because of suppressed and partially-suppressed wrongdoing by all the people we think the country should trust. Eventually people break and look for something else.
So, I agree with you, but in my opinion we do need to work more, not less, at transparency and truth even when it's problematic.
Curious about your point about time conflicts. Doesn't syncthing look at the change on your machine compared to the 'canonical' list also stored on your machine? So even if the timestamp is different, syncthing still detects the change, and the only problem is if the file is simultaneously modified on another machine before being propagated - which would be a conflict anyway.
If you ask Syncthing how to do local sync (e.g. to an external HDD), the answer is, use the right tool for the job: Unison.
If you ask Unison how to do certain things (directory timestamps is the one I miss), the answer is, use the right tool for the job: rsync.
In the end, it all comes down to rsync.
P.S. I'm actually gradually migrating up the chain from rsync, having used my own hand-built utility to make convenient rsync commands, but now using syncthing and Unison more.
Kind of. That improves your backup safety, but doesn't mitigate all the risks. E.g. if you accidentally delete everything from your backup directory, then all those deletions also happen on the sync'd one.
I think that's because both work on Android by being a VPN, and the system can't handle doing two vpns simultaneously