edel

There are many factors to take this decision, but mainly in how long in the term is the fetus and the resources situation of the family (work, economic, external support, their health, etc).

In an ideal world though, induced abortion should not exist since it is the society who should completely support, and adaptively to the children' special needs, but when society fails at that and, so far, #all societies are, it is the family and doctor the only ones who should only make the decision on a fetus. The only argument today should be when a fetus becomes a human.

We should treasure far more families that dedicate more than the usual percentage of resources to take care of their weakest of their members (children or parents) than basically anyone else in society like we do with youtubers, sport players, oligarchs, politicians, etc.

That is funny, all IT systems Spanish government is using still completely US (and even Israeli) sphere, but just the fact of raising concern for the most suspicious systems of being straight data collectors to funnel to the US (like GDPR was ever properly monitored) they place Spain to the Chinese orbit.

This Spanish government just want to balance between the two powers (Actually, after the 1st Global Digital Rights Forum, I don't even see the Spanish government wanted to be in the middle, just with a toe out of the US orbit.). Nevertheless, this is why "foreign entities" have since 2014 start financing the extreme-right in Spain (among several other actions) to destabilize that trend.

This is actually critically! I love little distros, but it does break my heart that they cannot give the same reassurance on potential malware as Mint would. Many here we are anti-AI but FOSS could benefit a lot from it... it can automatized checking for malware on peanuts. DistroWatch, Flatpak store, Debian backports, etc should be using AI already across the board to check for malware and that would level dramatically the plain field for all.

After the first year fully immersed in Linux, I would say most would agree with that statement "One can turn any distro into another", at least in what matters to them.

To any newcomer I recommend to choose the environment (The tendency is for the tech-minded that come from Windows is to choose KDE, less tech-minded or straightforward thinking choose Cinnamon and exclusive Mac and Android users tend to choose Gnome).
The second thing to select is your stand on Stability vs Cutting edge. The rest of features are far, far less relevant and you can easily fine tune to your like and these is what people mean with that above statement (even the environment and stability could be customized too but most would not be able to do it).

At the end, the distro is a choice where you pick the first two parameters and the exact distro you pick is more based in convenience and/or philosophical criteria.

My case: I played with 5 environments and KDE is my cup of tea. Then, I choose a distro in the middle of the road with updates (OpenSuse Tumbleweed) and while extremely happy two updates within 8 months gave me two hiccups (nothing mayor) but I decided I needed more Stability. While I consider Fedora to be the "best" distro by just a hairline, since it has the most resources, but philosophically I am against due to IBM being its main backer, not to mention, US may cause problems "exporting" in a near future... yes you can fork, but you still being dependent in the main source for a while, not to mention supporting IBMś aims. So I am Debian (MX Linux actually) all the way now. However, I recommend to most Mint (for the most conservative) and TuxedoOS (for those looking for a more contemporary look) to most people I encounter.

The rest of distros, or are just niche (for instance Deepin and Kylin cater for Chinese language, Cachy for gamers, etc) or are distros with far less resources to do it properly, but I passionately applaud their existence since they all are contributing with the good cause.

As I mentioned more in detail in other post, Proton is not the pro-MAGA many had misinterpreted. It is just sloppy at the marketing campaign and its leader makes statements that can easily misunderstood too.

That said, Proton has decided to aim for the masses, which has proven to be a winning business formula here. However, in that quest, it's natural that concerns from top-tier privacy users (Linux users, those wanting non-Google push notifications, too-many-eggs-in-a-basket, etc.) get relegated in favor of the bulk of their primary target customers, the regular Joe who simply wants to move away from email and web traffic scraping. We should all applaud that decision, but we also recognize the limitations and big risks of having a single company holding some 80% of this privacy market, both for us and even for Proton. It would be better to foster a healthy, diverse, and more equitable privacy ecosystem.

Thanks so much, this looks worth a deep look! Iĺl need time to interpret this properly.

Signal, I agree... it has flags for me in so many ways.

Tor. Unlikely though. For sure many nodes are controlled and now they are using massive power to unlock the traffic, but was not set up as a honeypot per se, it is now, probably, technologically quite compromised though.

Mullvad. Funny, your suspicions probably got enhanced when Mullvad makes a browser based on Tor's. But I still not highly suspect of Mullvad. Quite steady organic growth, profitable, no much pronouncements or catering to certain "targeted" groups... No mayor red flags for me.

Absolutely! Location does not guaranteed anything. The only case against US, four eyes... etc is that they have the power to shut it down easily so they can use it as a threat. Switzerland has, for years now, showed the same drive as any other country to do just that.

Now, I have seen very principled individuals in the US, I would say even more than in the Europe! It is not surprise that we see cases like Lavabit where a right owner chooses to close shop rather than compromise its customers. I hope GrapheneOS will do the same.

Of course, nobody is going to have evidence here, if there was any the cover would be lifted. But one can guess chances here:

Proton: "Unlikely"... but there is a but. They never cater for the ultimate privacy and they make typical blunders of a company wanted to growth really fast. Now, that they want to be a behemoth in Privacy makes it more vulnerable to requests from law enforcement. Also, law enforcement and intelligence agencies have it easier to penetrate within Proton massive headcount growth.

Tuta: "Very Unlikely". The people behind started very young and had a sustainable growth. The people are very visible (unlike Crypto AG) so least likely to be working for an "agency".

Mullvad: "Very Unlikely". I think their story is similar to Tuta (haven´t followed it that much though).

GrapheneOS: "Very Unlikely". But in the last year I have raised some minor concerns, but I haven change my rating yet....

/e/: "Very Unlikely". I know the dude behind for 2 decades, he wouldn´t. However, /e/ never claimed full privacy and from the beginning says he would comply 100% with "lawful" requests, but it is not a honeypot, not that would make much difference to an intelligence agency if they wanted it.

Signal: "Potentially"... yes, yes... audited, solid privacy code... but still does not make sense to me many aspects; financially solvent from day one, the extreme unquestioned massive and vast support from launching till today... if i have to bet in all of these providers, this platform would have been my take as potential compromised one. I still use it to communicate with family since I trust better than WhatsApp, but I would not use it for critical journalistic info.

I have not seen evidence of Proton "going the far right route" yet. They are just sponsoring channels that ever mention privacy and far right ones frequently does that too. You can blame proton for no scrutinize, but not of siding with the right or the left. Proton is just focusing in mayor growth and nothing else, for better or for worse.

Three things on Proton:

1. Proton mail has been in a rampage with sponsor YouTube channels and, in my opinion, that is a mistake. I would have kept it an organic growth, but that is me... a nobody, and Proton has become far more successful than no other email provider in the privacy world.

2. Considering even that, Proton is not vetting who is sponsoring. This is a fiasco. For instance they try to sponsor the channel "The hated one" that never takes any sponsors and even constantly criticizes channels that does it. That is a mayor blunder for Proton, there is no scrutiny at all with their marketing deployment. By the way, we learned that that youtubers get a juicy amount by Proton in these sponsorships (I think was $70 per subscription).

3. Proton, for years, has been aiming for the masses, not the most serious in privacy (for instance, androidś Proton email still uses Google push services). That is not bad per se, I still recommend Proton to many. But those with a more ideological approach to privacy or those requiring top notch on it, should be aiming for other service providers.

Thanks for the info... and yep, competition is good!

Yet, you have to recognize this feels like it was not handled appropriately by either party, I sense there was toxicity all around. Actually both suites could potentially be instantly benefiting from eachother but now I am afraid both will work to undermine the other, while both are in the same boat. No inspiring either if a third company (mainly Russian or Chinese) is thinking in financing a FOSS product.