Immutable distros are against the open-source ethos? That’s definitely a take.
I’m not sure about that. Mandating a locked-down system with signed modules will be a tough sell for the Linux crowd depending on how strict they make it. Removing the ability to customize your kernel and restricting what modules you can run goes against the entire open-source ethos.
Goodeye8@piefed.social 18 hours ago
Quetzalcutlass@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
Even with an immutable distro you’re able to take the source and modify and recompile it to fit your needs. If EAC only accepts kernels signed by “trusted partners” that freedom goes away.
Goodeye8@piefed.social 14 hours ago
But you recompiling the kernel into whatever you need means it’s no longer the same immutable distro, it’s a fork of said distro. Whoever is actually using that immutable distro has their kernel restricted. You said restricting the kernel is not compatible with open source. If we talk about the average user an immutable distro means exactly that, it restricts the users access to the kernel. The average user doesn’t know nor should know how to make their own custom kernel.
You’re just fear mongering with what ifs. If you fart you may shit your pants. Does that mean you’d be afraid to fart for the rest of your life or would you think that’s stupid and you’re not going to worry about some baseless hypothetical? What would you tell the person who’s telling you to be afraid of farts?
False@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
Yeah that sucks for sure. Unfortunately doing all that does solve some real problems outside of videogames
black0ut@pawb.social 5 hours ago
Those problems would be solved by server side anti cheat. There’s no way to solve cheating with client side anti cheat. The only reason they do it is because it’s cheaper and they can get your data. Using AC as an excuse to lock down or limit systems is similar to using kids as an excuse to ask for everyone’s ID and ban VPNs.