Why do I want h265. Didnt the copyright on h264 finally run out, so now I can use it without a license finally?

I’m not going to be using h265

Why dont they focus on hardware and drivers?

The last thing we need is another DE

What lead her astray?

He won’t understand. Do it for you, not him.

He’s not.

Its necessary. Do it.

Thats a good comparison to the end result, but he skipped the “get support of the military” step.

He just freed a bunch of criminal paramilitaries, but when push comes to shove, I think they’ll be quickly eliminated by the actual military.

I’d say it died when we accepted first past the post.

Lol wut. It died a lot longer ago

Have you read about US History? I recommend looking at presidents Andrew Jackson, Woodrow Wilson, and Richard Nixon.

Call them and tell them to open it. It probably isnt legal for them to close the port if you ask them to open it.

Lol no

Uh. Your interpretation of that phrase is different than ours

You have failed to find a doc that say signatures are required to be valid on the client for everything it downloads.

This software isn’t secure. You can live in la-la land, pretending it has features it doesn’t, but that doesn’t change the facts.

Nah, tech is insecure by default.

Link me to the docs that say this

Sorry here’s the link

https://wiki.debian.org/SecureApt

You’re the one spreading misinformation.

The burden of proof is on you. I linked you to the docs showing how package signatures have been required in apt since 2005. Most package managers do not have signature verification.

Point me to where the docs say signatures are required to be verified after download.

Yeah, thats optional. Unlike actual secure package managers like apt, where signing has been required since 2005.

What you need to look at is the docs for installing, and note it doesn’t say anything about requiring valid signatures after downloading a payload.

Flatpak doesn’t care about security. avoid them.

It doesn’t have package signing. The source is their documentation.