I have created an MCP server for the Linux desktop. It gives AI access to the Linux desktop. I developed this with the assistance of the AI.
desktopmcp connects AI assistants to the Linux desktop through three system interfaces: XDG Desktop Portals for desktop operations, AT-SPI for semantic UI understanding, and D-Bus for low-level system access. It exposes 144 tools over the Model Context Protocol, letting an AI see what's on screen, understand UI structure, move cursor, click buttons, type text, manage files, operate inputs and interact with desktop services.
I have moved to KeepassXC[1] on my desktop from Bitwarden. On phone, I use KeepassDX[2] which is Android client compatible with KeepassXC. On browser, I use KeepassXC Browser extension which connects with the desktop client. Since KeepassXC operates on a single file, you can use any Filesystem syncing tool to sync that file between devices or to store it in the cloud. I am really happy with the move.
I don't understand this. This post is saying that ChatGPT is good and is a forerunner because it provides a nice Mac App.
In my opinion, not everything requires a native app. AI Chat assistants are completely fine to be used in the web browser. for most used applications like slack, I do have native application( even slack which is website in a shell is completely usable as a desktop application). What i really don't understand is the benefit of a ChatGPT native application other than native widgets instead of web elements.
I agree. I use Bitwarden on my Samsung Android phone and also on my Linux desktop. Bitwarden currently supports passkeys on almost all the apps on my android including firefox. The same passkeys which i used to login on my phone can be used on my Linux desktop where i use Firefox with Bitwarden extension. What's now possible was not even possible at the start of this year. I haven't switched everything to passkeys but i can see it as an alternative to passwords now(passwords really shines in some areas too).
I read about Passkey comittee being against open source passkey managers during start of this year (can't reference it, sorry) but with open source password/key managers already supporting passkeys, i don't think it turned out to be true.
I am neither fond of Xorg nor Wayland. I have used both and I see shortcomings of both.
Xorg is Overly Bloated/Done without giving much importance to security.
On the other hand, Wayland is technically superior , might be more secure than Xorg. But, it's feature parity doesn't match with that of Xorg.
Now,i don't think those features must be pushed into Wayland itself. i don't know but something desktop oriented Wayland implementation with those missing pieces filled would be good idea.
But, will security suffer? Maybe. For example, Wayland is said to be secure because window can't see other windows. But, necessity arose due to requirement of Screen Recording so some API was created to access The Screen. So, didn't it make that security claim irrelevant because each window can access the screen? i think it's still not thought out properly.
I have created an MCP server for the Linux desktop. It gives AI access to the Linux desktop. I developed this with the assistance of the AI.
desktopmcp connects AI assistants to the Linux desktop through three system interfaces: XDG Desktop Portals for desktop operations, AT-SPI for semantic UI understanding, and D-Bus for low-level system access. It exposes 144 tools over the Model Context Protocol, letting an AI see what's on screen, understand UI structure, move cursor, click buttons, type text, manage files, operate inputs and interact with desktop services.