Yeah it quickly becomes a dick measuring contest and shunning people for using different things. It becomes very black/white views, and have some crazy out of touch takes, like expecting your grandma to self host lol. They also confuse anonymity with privacy, like how not being able to sign up for something with tor and monero is a privacy violation, it's not.

We don't believe that at all, we believe privacy is a human right. Also you're just objectively wrong about LLMs. Offline uncensored LLMs already exist, and will perpetually exist. We don't defend tools doing harm, we acknowledge it.

You miss the point. My point is that if you want to have a consistent view point, you need to acknowledge and defend the harmful sides. Encryption can objectively cause harm, but it should absolutely still be defended.

If it has the information, why not? Why should you be restricted by what a company deems appropriate. I obviously picked the bomb example as an extreme example, but that's the point.

Just like I can demonize encryption by saying I should be allowed to secretly send illegal content. If I asked you straight up if encryption is a good thing, you'd probably agree. If I mentioned its inevitable bad use in a shocking manner, would you defend the ability to do that, or change your stance that encryption is bad?

To have a strong stance means also defending the potential harmful effects, since they're inevitable. It's hard to keep values consistent, even when there are potential harmful effects of something that's for the greater good. Encryption is a perfect example of that.

Do gun manufacturers get in trouble when someone shoots somebody?

Do car manufacturers get in trouble when someone runs somebody over?

Do search engines get in trouble if they accidentally link to harmful sites?

What about social media sites getting in trouble for users uploading illegal content?

Mozilla doesn't need to host an uncensored model, but their open source AI should be able to be trained to uncensored. So I'm not asking them to host this themselves, which is an important distinction I should have made.

Which uncensored LLMs exist already, so any argument about the damage they can cause is already possible.

Anything that prevents it from my answering my query. If I ask it how to make me a bomb, I don't want it to be censored. It's gathering this from public data they don't own after all. I agree with Mozilla's principles, but also LLMs are tools and should be treated as such.

As much as I love Mozilla, I know they're going to censor it (sorry, the word is "alignment" now) the hell out of it to fit their perceived values. Luckily if it's open source then people will be able to train uncensored models

I thought it was just a giant retirement home for old white people

edit: nvm thinking of Iowa lol

As an American I pretty much agree this is decently accurate

Huh interesting, I actually had no idea those big apps used XMPP. Would it be easy for them to add e2ee if they wanted to?

Signal-Foss has been made redundant and has stopped development for years. They added push notifications on degoogled phones, but Signal added that themselves.

The CalyxOS repository is a smaller repo only preinstalled on CalyxOS phones and it's really rarely added outside of Calyx phones. So I'm going to take a guess you're running CalyxOS to have that on your fdroid. Which I love the CalyxOS project btw, I've used them for a number of years and did a few commits to the project.

that website is broken beyond belief, I can't confirm anything

talking about the police site, not the mastodon link