Been using it for a couple of years now I think. Haven’t seen a reason not to like it.

There’s a thread in GitHub where the privacyguides.org guys discussed some flaws in the encryption but that was at the very beginning, I remember reading those have been solved apparently.

Pricing, well, it seems cheap but honestly I think it’s just because we are used to seeing outrageous prices for ridiculously small amounts of storage. Thinking about it, 30 eur for 100gb is not cheap at all, like some other comment says when compared to physical drive prices. Plus, offering lifetime is a common marketing technique to attract customers used by small or starting businesses. I don’t know if that is the case here but it certainly isn’t an automatic red flag for me. I don’t know if they are gonna be around next year or 5 years from now, but I’m willing to take the risk. They claim to have lots of users and be cash flow sustainable, plus they keep developing and are getting into business features to attract that kind of customers, certainly doesn’t look like a business on life support to me.

App and code-wise, they are much better than they were a year ago. Android app is still a bit janky sometimes but I don’t use it a lot so I got not much to say, other than I can see my files and upload something small once in a while just fine. The desktop client is amazing, the best functioning client for Linux that I have used from any service, or from the few services that have a Linux client at least. The clients are open source and since the service is e2ee you don’t really need to see the server code if the client encryption is done correctly, which apparently there is no sign that it isn’t, as mentioned before.

Overall I would say you can use it, but keep a backup somewhere else just in case, which is just the thing that anyone should be doing anyways.

Thanks, you give me something to check out with that thing about the changes to the plot.

In general GNOME is frustratingly good. I do find myself wanting more options for customisation every once in a while, and jump to another option. But after a week I remember that no other option Is as smooth and polished and end up right back with GNOME.

Just finished Sea of Tranquility by Emily St. John Mandel.

It’s good, but I found it to be unmoving. I can see that whatever is written is well written but it didn’t made me feel anything. I didn’t find it funny, emotional, surprising, annoying. At no point I was tempted to stop reading it nor I was anxious to continue. For me it’s a really solid 7/10. Maybe I’m in the minority on that and maybe it’s because it’s not the kind of book that I would usually read.

On what’s next I have been wanting to read the Three Body Problem but I’m curious about the translation. I’ve read books in english that were originally written in my native spanish and there’s definitely a certain feel to them. It will be the first book originally in Chinese that I read, so I wonder about the translation, and if it would be better to get an English translation or a Spanish translation.

If you don’t have the newest hardware i would also recommend Mint. I believe is the most friendly to windows users plus is Ubuntu based so there’s pretty much anything available to it, and lots of support if needed. Nothing of the software you mention seems like a problem since everything is available or runs in the browser.

Remember to enable proton for all games in the steam settings so that you can run your entire library.

If you en up using a local office suite I would instead of LibreOffice recommend Onlyoffice, in my experience has better compatibility with the ms office formats. You can keep both installed, that’s what I do.

Teams I haven’t used but there’s a flatpak available I believe, so I think it shouldn’t be a problem, or you can run it in the browser.

If you have newish hardware then maybe fedora will be a better option, probably the kde spin. Everything else is the same, just with fedora is indispensable to use the rpm fusion repositories.

Less than one minute in reading and there’s already one big misrepresentation and one outright lie.

He tries to ‘clear’ the misconception that Mozilla develops software by showing the areas of focus of the foundation, making a point about how it should be software development and instead are some vague ideological goals.

But the foundation should be ideological. The browser is ideological and lots of the users use it because of ideology. There would be absolutely no issue with that even if the fact that is the corporation and not the foundation the one that focuses on software development weren’t true. Open the frontpage of any big open source project that works with a foundation (GNOME, Fedora, Linux) and you will see front and center the big focus on promotion of ideological values. And those are values focused on internet freedom, which are absolutely related to software.That’s what a foundation does. That’s the way things are. And yet open mozilla.org and the first thing you’ll see is the software it makes. So what’s really the accusation there?

Second point makes the previous accusation make even less sense. He proceeds to show financial balances about reduction in expenses that show that the biggest one is software development. So the reality shows that Mozilla is focused on software development. The accusation goes that precisely software development is the area with the biggest cuts. One could argue that doing more with less is a good thing, specially knowing how exactly the types like the author frequently use smaller projects like librefox or ungoogled chromium as an example of a smaller more focused project that firefox should be, but I won’t do that. Instead I will point out how his accusation of the biggest cuts to software development are and outright lie easily visible to anyone with eyes and basic arithmetic knowledge. While software development saw 41 million in cuts, administration and management costs went down almost 60 million. One would think that’s a good thing and exactly the kind of point he should be noticing given the accusation, but if the foundation is becoming leaner in the management side that would kind of render his whole text moot, so he ignores that.

I will keep reading and analyze each point on his own, but after this and knowing very well this kind of people I don’t think anyone could trust this analysis. I’m sure I’ll come across the author anonymously on 4chan attacking ‘pozzilla’ and their ‘trannyware’ (I’m sorry) or on twitter harassing women developers, and I’ll let him know my opinions.

Thanks for your service