Well, first they are lying to you. You don’t have to hand out certificates manually and that isn’t how Intune does it either. They are provisioned using SCEP generally, which has its own security drawbacks. You can get these certificates from a SCEP server using a tool like Certmonger.

Most companies that say they don’t officially support Linux already have you sign an acceptable-use agreement to only use company-provided hardware and approved software. And while they may act like they’ll make a special exception for you, you better make sure you got it in writing and in a way that would comply with your other employment agreements. One thing most IT employees don’t have the privilege of is negotiating the legal terms of their employment. There are already multiple US cases of employees being criminalized for breaking their employer’s AUP.

I wish you the best of luck, but feel like you’re prob in for a harsh reality.

You can use Wi-Fi certificates on Linux without needing Intune. Is the real issue here that your workplace doesn’t want to give you the info you need to use Linux?

What would having Intune offer you personally? Are you a smart Linux user or barely know enough to be dangerous?

Go to your IT department or management and tell them you want to use Linux for work if that is what you want, and if they say no then make up your mind if you’re willing to become a braindead zombie for the company, or if you’d rather be doing something actually useful and meaningful with your time.

And in other news, X still requires users to sign in to see almost anything.

Democrats are still always posting on X, and then users are forced to sign up for X to see their post, and then users are radicalized by the nonstop bots and AI feed manipulation going on by Musk… Pretty soon there will be no Democrats left.

As people get ready to vote here in the US, one issue I haven’t even heard brought up is the lack of privacy regulations in the US. Do most people not care if the person they’re voting for is fine with every corporation selling and sharing personal data?

Regulations

So the government decided to abuse the most vulnerable people. Welcome to America!

Because Israel claims anything against genocide is antisemitic. Their pro-Israeli employees prob complain about the mental anguish for the anti-genocide posts which they view as pro-Hamas.

Many of those companies employ use third parties to store those videos and use them to train AI in products that they sell.

Yeah, they sell those security videos and are using them for AI training, etc.

Yeah that just isn’t true. If this was true I could charge every business that has ever stored videos of me.

Such a security risk though, but still better than curling scripts into sudo

Telegram isn’t made to be a full E2EE messenger. They have things like public channels which you can’t do with E2EE. What kind of idiots thought that Telegram was intended to be a fully E2EE messenger? People use it cause it is native and good for its purposes. It has secret chats if you need them at times. Why all the hate from the Signal CIA fanbois?

The comment where everything’s made up and the points don’t matter

I agree… however, that is an issue with the content creators relying on using content promotions. I have noticed when skipping ahead in videos that it usually indicates in the progress bar where the promotion ends. If the content producers utilized other ways to contribute and I liked them enough, then I’d do that. YouTube now has a subscriber only feature that should help with this. There are also extensions that are supposed to block sponsors too. I don’t think YouTube has implemented any functions to make blocking sponsored ads more difficult, especially for paying users… who knows though.

But you’re not. You’ve made several comments on this post criticizing the people who 1. want control over their own devices and 2. are sick of ads being forced into every aspect of their lives.

They have control over their devices. You’re not making sense and can’t even articulate how they don’t have control. If they want even more control, they can install GrapheneOS or a plethora of third party ROMs that removes all Google services. Apple users can’t even do that. No one is making them use YouTube either. Google allows third party apps that blocks ads. It isn’t like a… “Ha, Google you’re idiots we are smarter than you cause you are too stupid to block ads.” Seriously, what kind of dumb person takes this attitude?

And I happen to think that a company throwing such an entitled fit over money, when they are making an immoral amount of profit that is increasing YoY, is super relevant when discussing the profitability of one of their services.

Dumb users are the ones throwing an entitled fit. Why is making profit immoral? If you want to say, “I’m anti-capitalist and don’t think the world should be about money…” then just say that. It is a much stronger argument and one that should be discussed more, but singling out Google is dumb. In terms of ethics, they are still way better than most companies, including Apple & Microsoft… In what realitydoes it make sense to attack the more ethical companies before going after the least ethical?

YouTube doesn’t owe you cause they made profit

Read your previous comment.

People always complain when their convenience is removed from them. Welcome to the human condition.

Not always. If I go to a coffee shop and they give me a free one out of convenience… I don’t go back and demand they keep giving them to me for free cause they did it once.

I can understand why people circumvent them too. I can’t understand why they’d claim… “Hey Google, you suck at blocking ads. You can’t stop us from doing it.”

Seriously, fuck people that do this. Google knows people use third party apps that block ads. They might as well say… we’re not happy not having ads. We want Google to block it entirely so we can be even more pissed off.

I don’t care if you use ad blockers. I get annoyed when people publish articles like… “Google is losing the adblockers war” cause then advertisers are going to start pushing harder for Google to actually prevent adblockers entirely, which they could have done already. Thus far Google, despite issues, does quite a lot of good things… Android is the only open source OS out of Apple & Windows. Android lets you install third party app stores. Chrome (Chromium) is open source… etc.

These users writing this content don’t even develop the apps to block YouTube ads. If you’ve ever explored the APIs by YouTube, then you’d know that Google despite pushing ads for users without blockers, is still rather friendly to third party apps.

I’m sorry… I didn’t realize the reason that there are so many Starbucks in America, like literally caddy corner from one another is because their customer base is the “privileged minority.” I’ll have to remember that line.

In all seriousness, you could argue that ads prey on poor vulnerable people unable to afford YouTube Premium that just want to use it to learn, and that would be a semi-coherent argument.