harishpillay

Perhaps this: https://github.com/yusufcanb/tlm?

it is not distro bundled (yet), but I have it running on my Fedora Linux 39 running on a NUC with 16GB of RAM. Performance is good enough for me.

My solution to this is to have https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/enhancer-for-... installed in my browser. It is also available for Chromium. It works perfectly and I have not been interrupted with ads at all. Highly recommended.

While I understand the need to support content creators, the way the ads work is highly disruptive of the flow of the contents of the video. I have no issue if the ads are at the start of the video (or even the end), but the way it has been showing up on browsers that don't have this plugin, is downright annoying.

I've been running a Jitsi server for a few years on my home network. Came in very handy during the lockdown. The setup is Jitsi running on a Debian 11 VM that is on a CentOS Stream 8 host. The hardware is an Intel NUC which has 16G of RAM. The VM has been allocated 4G. The typical number of users in one session is about 15. This Jitsi server is reachable via the public Internet as well as on my own Wireguard network.

Red Hat "fork[ing] most of the upstream" is not telling the whole story. Yes, Red Hat works with upstream code, does additional QE/QA and certification as needed and make that available to customers on a subscription. Changes, improvements, bugfixes etc are all also sent back upstream. It is a two way street. Not a one way "take from upstream only" model. If that was the model, Red Hat would have not survived to thrive. Upstream First is the default for Red Hat.

Red Hat's code base is a mix of GPLv2/v3, MIT, BSD, Apache - ie, it spans the entire open source licensing spectrum from protective copyleft (GPL) to non-protective (BSD, Apache, MIT). Red Hat is only obligated to release code to GPL code that it ships to customers, but Red Hat goes above and beyond and ships all code that it worked on or otherwise to customers. There is ZERO value in holding back code/fixes etc. Pushing that upstream empowers the whole global community (yes, including competitors). Not doing so will result in fragmentation of the various open source code bases and downstream products.

Trademarks are not the same as copyright. Trademarks tell the receiver who it represents. It is the identity of the entity. So, that is protected and I think that is very fair.

Disclosure: I work for Red Hat.

This commentary is incredibly inaccurate. The code of version 1 of tracetogether was open sourced in April 2020. The server side wasn't open sourced. There was a hardware based version of tt that went through a community based tear down and it was reliably determined to be only doing (as did the phone app version) ONLY bluetooth-based contact collection. At NO time is any GPS or location data collected. The hardware token only has a bt based hardware and nothing else.

It is true that the Government kept insisting that there is no way the data will be used for any other use and the minister who kept repeating that in parliament subsequently had to apologise that it was indeed used for a murder case. But, legislation was introduced to specifically limit the use cases of any of the data collected - https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/proposed-restrictions....

The contact data in the phone or hardware token is stored for 21 days in a rolling manner with only the latest 21 days available and should there be a need to send the data to the health authorities in the event that there is a need for actual contact tracing, the data extraction is a two step process: a) the owner of the device (phone/token) has to agree to the extraction b) there is a OTP-like code sent to the individual for it to be entered into the phone for the data to be extracted.

Now, should the person deem that he/she does not want to make the data available, the app in the phone can be deleted and be done with. At which point nothing much can be done for subsequent contact tracing.

The right to privacy of data etc is embodied in the Personal Data Protection Act of 2012 (https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/PDPA2012) and all of the data in the app/token is convered by that law.

Yes, trust in the Singapore Government dropped many notches when it was revealed that despite numerous assurances that data won't be used for anything else, that it was indeed used and for a specific criminal investigation, it left a bad impression that the SG govt has not recovered from yet. Suffice to say, as of last month, you can delete the phone app and just take the battery out of the hardware token and be done with it. There are, however, a small set of scenarios where the "SafeEntry checkin" via the tt/token is needed - for places where there are large number of people attending, like weddings, concerts, etc. What I've done is to "force stop" the app in the phone, deny bluetooth access to it and just keep the app still installed.