Other Distros

[James C]

A collaboration between the Mepis and antiX communities has resulted in MX-14.Final was released today..Debian based naturally.

http://www.mepiscommunity.org/mx

Release announcement
http://antix.mepis.org/index.php?title=Main_Page#News

Core
Linux kernel 3.12 pae
Debian 7.3
Xfce 4.10.2
Details: type in terminal inxi -F

Properties
Fits on a CD
Runs in live mode in 10 languages
Live persistence and remastering
Snapshot tool
Default Browser: QupZilla 1.6.3
Video Player: VLC 2.1.4
Music Manager/Player: Clementine 1.2.2
Email client: Claws-mail 3.9.3-1
LibreOffice 4.1.4.2

[James C]

For those with older hardware there is now a MX-14 non-pae i486 release....

https://sourceforge.net/projects/antix- ... nal/MX-14/

MX-14 homepage
http://www.mepiscommunity.org/mx

[Billtoo]

Ubuntu 14.04 beta 2 is out.
It's working well so far.
EDIT:
I installed Ubuntu 14.04 LTS Beta 2 64bit to a dual core hp desktop pc, it's
working great so far.
Computer
Processor 2x Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU E4500 @ 2.20GHz
Memory 4038MB (523MB used)
Operating System Ubuntu Trusty Tahr (development branch)
User Name bill (Bill)
Date/Time Sun 30 Mar 2014 10:34:35 AM EDT
Display
Resolution 1920x1080 pixels
OpenGL Renderer Mesa DRI Intel(R) G33
X11 Vendor The X.Org Foundation
Linksys WUSB54GC v1 802.11g Adapter [Ralink RT73]

[nooby]

I always make of use Linux Mint instead. It has a lot of needed
programs already installed while on Ubunti you need
to install and these are gone next time time you boot up
if you do Frugal iso-booting which is the fast and easy method for
some of us perennial noobs.

[d4p]

Ubuntu-Entwickler warnt vor Einsatz von Linux Mint
http://winfuture.de/news,78916.html

[stu91]

Back in puppy land
Been using Cruchbang for the last several months, it's a great distro but its taxing my old laptop and its failing hard drive a little to much - so back in puppy land with an old favourite, dpup exprimo!

[Eyes-Only]

Welcome back Stu as you've been missed! I was wondering where that prolific contributor to Puppy had gone... and now I know! ( Honestly! I never think to send private messages to people asking them where they are or if they're okie, etc. -sigh!- )

Again Stu, welcome back. Good to have you home from walkabout.

Cheers/Amicalement,

Eyes-Only
"L'Peau-Rouge"

[Fossil]

The same can be said for you, Eyes-Only. Welcome back; you've been missed! Cheers/Amicalement!

[nooby]

My English is not good expressing these things
but I agree with Eyes-Only and others both of you
are important contributors and friendly part of the forum.

[stu91]

Welcome back Stu as you've been missed! I was wondering where that prolific contributor to Puppy had gone... and now I know! ( Honestly! I never think to send private messages to people asking them where they are or if they're okie, etc. -sigh!- )

Again Stu, welcome back. Good to have you home from walkabout.

Cheers/Amicalement,

Eyes-Only
"L'Peau-Rouge"

Thanks Eyes-Only

There's been quite a bit of change round these parts in the short time i have been away now looking forward to getting back in the grove of things

[stu91]

My English is not good expressing these things
but I agree with Eyes-Only and others both of you
are important contributors and friendly part of the forum.

Hi Nooby,
Hope you are keeping strong? I have been using Crunchbang these last few months - not sure if you can frugal install it but certainly worth a try as it is a nice distro

[Eyes-Only]

Thank you very much Fossil and nooby... but I haven't "gone" anywhere at all. I'm here nearly every day. I simply read in the background these days as much of this programming stuff is way far over my head, unfortunately.

C'est la vie...

But thanks again for the notice as it was very much appreciated!

Cheers/Amicalement!

Eyes-Only
"L'Peau-Rouge"

[James C]

Still running LXLE on this old dual-core.....pretty solid with no real problems.

http://lxle.net/

Code: Select all

james@james-GeForce7050M-M:~$ uname -r
3.2.0-60-generic

[bark_bark_bark]

One of these days I am going to install some linux distro on my netbook as a place to store files from my desktop.

BTW, Does anybody know how i can protect myself from my netbook's webcam.

[CLAM01]

bark_bark_bark,
The quick and easy, and a sure, way to protect yourself from being on-camera on a built-in web-cam is to pull off one of the stickers on the palm-rest of the keyboard and re-stick it over the web-cam lens. This leaves the computer stock and the cam available for occasional use, and remote monitors get only no picture, not an "equipment malfunction/disabled" notice. An alternative is to pull the back off the display (on most e-books the backs snap on, no screws) and rip out the cam (and mic, if you also don't want to be sound-recorded by the NSA or any equivalent)and throw away. These methods are positive, sure ways to stop cam-snoop. Note that everything else you do with your PC can still possibly be remotely recorded. You should look inside and remove any pci devices you don't recognize and need, and disable pci slots and all remote access options, in BIOS. Manufacturers and sellers sometimes add things. Even then you can't be sure, especially with a PXE BIOS, which is factory built to facilitate remote operation of your computer. You should also avoid all woof-built puppies 571 and later, which are malware, for having remote access, not only remote monitoring, which at least some 4- and all 5-series puppies appear to have had built in. Nowadays it is best to always assume that any PC that connects to the web is insecure and probably monitorable, if notbeing monitored, especially while it is connected to the web, and if its wireless cannot be turned off by hardware switch or removal, when it starts up (when it may connect and upload stored metadata, keystrokes, browser history [even if you deleted your own] etc.).

[starhawk]

If your netbook is black, put two strips of electrical tape over the cam. One is probably enough, but overkill here is not going to hurt anything.

Or, if you know your netbook very well, you can simply open it up and remove the webcam entirely.

FWIW, most if not all webcams have a little LED next to them. Watch that LED -- you're only in trouble when it's on that's a hardware function that cannot be defeated in software, AFAIK.

It's worth noting, at least for the record, that this is quite likely tinfoil hat territory -- I have a netbook myself, I've had it since 2009, and the only times the webcam has ever been in use, for sure, is when I've accidentally triggered it. I have no use for it, but once in a while in XP I'd hit the wrong button and have to turn it off again. Nobody has ever remotely triggered that webcam, and I rather suspect that nobody ever will.

[nooby]

Barry would have detected such differences
and would have warned us not to use the
these features on modern computers.

Where do I look or knowing my hardware/software that have the
that remote control at usage time installed and active?

Do you have any links to back up your claim with?

[bark_bark_bark]

FWIW, most if not all webcams have a little LED next to them. Watch that LED -- you're only in trouble when it's on that's a hardware function that cannot be defeated in software, AFAIK.

Mine doesn't have an LED. Techincally the NSA could still record without triggering the LED.

[CLAM01]

Physical disablement of devices is the only sure way to prevent remote monitoring, with physical removal being the most sure. remote operation for monitoring accesses are done at low-level and operate in background, so notification information is optional. Most on-screen indication is echo function, and echo must be specified, and can be to turned off ('noecho'), and usually is not called and is turned off by remote operators. The most common remote monitoring I have encountered has been sound, done broad-spectrum to look for pirate music, followed by key-stroke for user-info. If you put your own monitoring program in your computer you can monitor your sound volume (for example) and be alerted, for example, if it is un-muted, if muted, or turned up, if no sound is heard by a remote monitor, but he thinks there should be some (if you have put sound to a visual echo to draw them, for example). The same with web-cams. If you have an active-web-cam program monitoring your web-cam but have the cam blocked you can be alerted when remote operation and adjustment efforts are made, as a remote operator tries to get a picture from the operating but not "seeing" cam.

Nooby,
BK has installed some of the monitoring software in puppies, including the write-home feature to the NSA's data-mining enterprise "Nugget Enterprises" and net-bot center "ICANHAZIP" and the backdoor in his last, 571. Both appear to be to let "law enforcement" in, and so appear to be "law enforcement" "request" installations, which usually means coercions, since resisting "law-enforcement" is futile (or expensive, as Kim DotCom could tell you). The problem today is that "law enforcement" is equivalent to "gangster". This means that it is not, or not for long, for real law-enforcement purpose, or law-enforcement purpose only. In addition, once a backdoor is installed, and used, it becomes known and once known is not that hard for professionals to find and operate. Criminal abusers are professionals, and, today, as often as not may also be "law enforcement" and government spy professionals, and ones to whom commercial data captures are potential trading stock to make mutual back-scratch deals with industry "partners" to help gain an entry, or a "favor".

What we have today in internet-land is gangster-land anarchy. For this I recommend to go back to paper and post office, to not do any business electronically that might expose anything you want to keep private, or protect from theft, and to set up for your personal use only a computer that cannot attach to any network. This will not, of course, protect you from government-agent burglarizing, which is also popular among "law enforcement" agents today.

[James C]

BK has installed some of the monitoring software in puppies, including the write-home feature to the NSA's data-mining enterprise "Nugget Enterprises" and net-bot center "ICANHAZIP" and the backdoor in his last, 571. Both appear to be to let "law enforcement" in, and so appear to be "law enforcement" "request" installations, which usually means coercions, since resisting "law-enforcement" is futile (or expensive, as Kim DotCom could tell you). The problem today is that "law enforcement" is equivalent to "gangster". This means that it is not, or not for long, for real law-enforcement purpose, or law-enforcement purpose only. In addition, once a backdoor is installed, and used, it becomes known and once known is not that hard for professionals to find and operate. Criminal abusers are professionals, and, today, as often as not may also be "law enforcement" and government spy professionals, and ones to whom commercial data captures are potential trading stock to make mutual back-scratch deals with industry "partners" to help gain an entry, or a "favor".

Totally unsubstantiated bulls**t.How about some evidence instead of just your vivid imagination.