My point is. With Linux and FOSS software, you do not necessarily need to treat programs as hostile. By default, most software is open and can be audited. If you decide to extensively use proprietary software then you have bigger problems that even Little Snitch cannot solve.
There are better alternative routes you can take that do not involve a "MITM" for all your connections.
> You can apply more flexible rules than just blocking specific hostnames -- for example, based on IP subnets, port numbers, or specific binary executables
This doesn't sound like a common use case. You can already block connection on a specific port with all available firewall programs. And you can bubblewrap binaries from making internet connections.
> You can block connections even from programs that bypass the default system-wide DNS configuration
Other than browser's making use of DOH for DNS, I can't think of a common use case for this. Besides, why would I want to Wireshark my browser? Why not use uBlock to filter domains.
Doesn't seem obvious to me why one would go through all this trouble.
So Wireshark but with connection permission toggles... Why does anyone need this on Linux? You can already block domains you know are malicious in the hosts file or use a personalized DNS resolver for that. Or am I missing something?
Not in support of the above poster's views btw, but I think he gave the analogy in a broader sense. Your take on this mirror analogy is from a micro-level. I still think looking at FB from a birds-eye view, the society mirror assessment is fairly accurate.
Reminds me of a situation where I had to do tech support for a pal who had bought a Chinese phone (later learned it was a Xiaomi device). Turns out for some reason the Chinese model didn't have Google play store pre-installed since it is useless in their home market. However to get around this restriction, you had to locate one of the system apps, then search for a specific app inside it that would then install the Google play store.
Also, unrelated but obligatory. Huawei after the Trump ban now offers a de-googled smartphone experience.
Last I checked it's not illegal to be a fascist. Hacking computer systems and stealing data however is illegal. Whether this is right or wrong is debatable. Free speech shouldn't be.
This increase of extreme assault on free-speech platforms should be worrying to everyone. Not too long ago, we were hailing the "internet" as a free fair space. Now it is a free fair space ... for everyone but some kind of people.
I'm for free speech but this specific kind of targeted attacks is getting out of hand.
I disagree, 4K HDR even on LCD panels is worth the picture. And a major jump from 1080p. Though what I agree with you about is the OLED prices. Been ages and still no indication of the prices climbing down.
> How could they not be responsible for the adverts they run?
Except Facebook is not a political outfit (though debatable depending on who you ask) but rather, a private business. Anything they do or don't do is determined by their business interests.
Mind you,, if Facebook don't take this advertising money,, pretty sure their competitors in the ad space will be glad to fill that vacuum.
TIL The vast userbase of HN is 95% Apple, 3% Android, 0.0005% Pinephone. The remaining ~1% don't even make a digital footprint since they use the old Nokia 3310 type phones.
Little snitch is effectively a MITM app for all connections on the system it is installed on.