[HN Gopher] Recall for Linux
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Recall for Linux
        
       Author : anticensor
       Score  : 495 points
       Date   : 2025-10-27 07:24 UTC (15 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (github.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
        
       | anticensor wrote:
       | Recall is not a reverse RDP capture.
        
       | GianFabien wrote:
       | This is an app I will not be installing.
        
         | rplnt wrote:
         | Exactly, it will be installed for you!
        
         | deafpolygon wrote:
         | Someone else will take care of that minor detail for you!
        
       | phs318u wrote:
       | I thought this was a serious take for a second (until I looked at
       | microsoft_recall_linux.exe - lol).
       | 
       | Having said that, I would actually be keen for something similar
       | that is both open-source and totally local so that I could use
       | the output as AI fodder (for a local inference model of course).
        
         | theblazehen wrote:
         | https://github.com/mediar-ai/screenpipe is promising, however
         | it has some issues with my setup. I'm personally just dumping
         | all the data with ffmpeg + x11grab, will figure out what I want
         | to do with it later
        
           | skerit wrote:
           | Windows & macos only though. "linux support coming soon" has
           | been on that website forever.
        
             | theblazehen wrote:
             | That's for the fancy GUI. Basic "capture and dump to disk"
             | is supported on Linux with the cli version
        
         | RobotToaster wrote:
         | Same.
         | 
         | I have a terrible memory so a totally local ai that knows
         | everything I do would actually be useful.
        
           | jeroenhd wrote:
           | That's the biggest problem I have with Recall. Not that the
           | idea or functionality is bad, but that the probability that
           | the company behind it will abuse it is so large that it's not
           | worth the risk.
           | 
           | If the system worked fully locally, didn't come from
           | Apple/Microsoft/Google/Facebook/etc., and had decent data
           | isolation, I would probably turn it on.
           | 
           | Unfortunately I find that getting basic OCR to work reliably
           | on Linux is a challenge in itself compared to Windows' APIs
           | and quality of OCR results, so I doubt an honest, well-
           | intentioned implementation will make it to Linux.
        
         | ValdikSS wrote:
         | When I was working in audits, I used to record everything
         | happening on my screen with 3 fps and then rewatching it with
         | 10x speed, just not to forget anything.
         | 
         | When Recall was announced, I was in minority who thought it was
         | super cool technology.
        
           | XorNot wrote:
           | There's nothing wrong with the concept, but if it's not local
           | with you in total control of the data then it's also just a
           | no go.
        
           | noir_lord wrote:
           | > I was in minority who thought it was super cool technology.
           | 
           | The technology can be cool while still be a horrific idea
           | because of the implementation and privacy implications.
        
             | compsciphd wrote:
             | the privacy implications are really no worse than people
             | who have a web browser cache/history, use a password
             | manager, and have their entire email/message history
             | available for offline perusal on their computer/device.
             | 
             | just like an attacker can go after the recall data, they
             | can go after those well known sources of data as well,
             | which are generally not encrypted.
             | 
             | Which is why, for example, the changes signal made to
             | prevent recall from working when it was visible, were pure
             | virtue signalling. By default signal on the PC keeps all
             | messages sent available in a db that any attacker can
             | easily download.
             | 
             | The entire criticism aimed at recall ignored all the other
             | ways this data is stored on one's PC.
        
             | meowface wrote:
             | As long as it's stored and processed locally, I don't
             | really see the implications being that much worse than
             | someone getting all your local IRC/IM/email logs. (Those or
             | their equivalents are stored in the cloud nowadays but
             | disregard that for now for the sake of argument.)
        
               | mschuster91 wrote:
               | > As long as it's stored and processed locally
               | 
               | Anything stored locally can be exfiltrated by malware.
               | Run OCR on the archives, check when someone opens their
               | password manager, copy and exfiltrate the password.
               | 
               | Oh and partners, ex-partners and children can also abuse
               | such data. Even if you clear your browsing history,
               | forget about clearing the Recall cache and whoops, they
               | can see your browsing habits post-facto.
               | 
               | Employers and law enforcement agencies are another bad
               | actor that's to guard against. Even if laws such as GDPR
               | or employee safety regulations prohibit companies from
               | screenrecording, there's not much stopping them from
               | using a feature Microsoft tries its hardest to prevent
               | people from opting out of.
        
               | 63stack wrote:
               | It has been over a decade that big tech has been playing
               | this script:
               | 
               | * Introduce a feature that is abysmal for user privacy
               | 
               | * Promise it's okay because $reasons
               | 
               | * Make the feature opt-out
               | 
               | * Change the EULA so that $reasons are no longer
               | applicable/valid
               | 
               | * Roll out an update that "accidentally" turns the
               | feature back on for everyone
               | 
               | * Apologize, deny, divert, deflect
               | 
               | * Siphon off all that sweet sweet user data
               | 
               | Rinse and repeat. Get away with it every time. People
               | still go "oh I don't see the problem, they said
               | $reasons". This time "it's stored locally". Until it
               | won't.
        
               | kccqzy wrote:
               | You are merely objecting to Microsoft being the developer
               | behind Recall. Great I don't fault you for that. But now
               | consider hypothetically what if the Linux Foundation
               | developed and announced Recall?
        
               | 63stack wrote:
               | The linux foundation would introduce this is an optional
               | thing you can download, with documentation on how it
               | works, and where you can find the source. Within 3 days
               | the community would make self hosted servers for it.
               | 
               | They are not known for siphoning user data through dark
               | patterns, so there is nothing to object from me. If they
               | were to try it the same underhanded way as microsoft, I'd
               | be just as much against it.
        
               | embedding-shape wrote:
               | > As long as it's stored and processed locally
               | 
               | If it was any other company than Microsoft, I might have
               | agreed with you that it's fine as long as those things
               | happen.
               | 
               | But if history is any indication of the future, as soon
               | as the tool gets popular, Microsoft will try to claw back
               | whatever data it can about it's users, or add Pro
               | features only available to signed up Microsoft users who
               | pay, or something similar.
               | 
               | I think many of us have been burned by these companies
               | doing bait-and-switch so many times, that it's almost
               | impossible to not see the writing on the wall here and
               | even spend five minutes trying it out.
               | 
               | I much rather wait for the inevitable (serious) FOSS
               | clone that will be safer to use instead.
        
               | noir_lord wrote:
               | > I much rather wait for the inevitable (serious) FOSS
               | clone that will be safer to use instead.
               | 
               | Yep - though I've no interest in a tool like Recall (I
               | don't really see the point, it doesn't do anything for me
               | I'd want) I do understand that others may feel
               | differently but even if I did want it, I'd wait for the
               | FOSS version as well.
        
               | esseph wrote:
               | The equivalent of screenscraping passwords, API keys,
               | etc.
        
           | LauraMedia wrote:
           | I think there is a difference between "I can audit the code,
           | it's encrypted, I want to run this and want to use this" and
           | "Microsoft installs it, it's not encrypted and wants to turn
           | it on by default, potentially sharing data to them soon(tm)"
        
           | ksynwa wrote:
           | The technology is cool. It's microsoft that's not. Tools like
           | this already existed on Mac.
        
           | embedding-shape wrote:
           | > When Recall was announced, I was in minority who thought it
           | was super cool technology.
           | 
           | I think almost every serious computer professional want
           | something like Recall, I don't think you were in the minority
           | at all.
           | 
           | But the amount of people who want the least security-minded
           | company of probably all time to manage that software, and for
           | that program to ignore the last three decades of
           | security/privacy methodologies, is probably something way
           | less people want, and is why Recall is being shit on.
           | 
           | If a non-profit managed it, it had a security/privacy-first
           | mindset/goals, and was run by non-Microsoft people, I think
           | it could be a really useful tool.
        
           | andrepd wrote:
           | Like several modern pieces of technology, it would in fact be
           | "super cool" if only it ran locally and respected your
           | privacy, and if it weren't in fact just a paper-thin excuse
           | for massive and constant surveillance.
        
         | Citizen_Lame wrote:
         | That's what people crave.
        
         | mnmalst wrote:
         | It kinda IS a working solution tho. recall-for-linux.exe is
         | just a bash script that does this in a loop. :)
         | 
         | grim - | tee ~/.recall/$(date "+%Y-%m-%dT%H-%M-%S").png |
         | tesseract stdin stdout 2>/dev/null >~/.recall/$(date
         | "+%Y-%m-%dT%H-%M-%S").log
        
         | loutr wrote:
         | It's a joke yes but it does work, in a really crude way. The
         | exe is actually a short bash script, it takes a screenshot
         | every 5 seconds, feeds it to tesseract (OCR) and dumps the
         | result in ~/.recall.
        
         | geocar wrote:
         | > I would actually be keen for something similar that is both
         | open-source and totally local
         | 
         | Did you _actually_ look at it? Or just look _at_ it? Because it
         | is actually open-source and totally local.                   #
         | ... nonsense         while true; do           grim - | tee
         | ~/.recall/$(date "+%Y-%m-%dT%H-%M-%S").png | tesseract stdin
         | stdout 2>/dev/null >~/.recall/$(date "+%Y-%m-%dT%H-%M-%S").log
         | # ... other nonsense         done
         | 
         | I think all the nonsense/emojis are supposed to be funny, but
         | that actually does the thing. Replace "tesseract" with whatever
         | local AI you want; replace grim with some other screenshotting
         | tool if you like.
         | 
         | I've done something like this for over a decade (although I
         | have a diff that deletes duplicate frames) and I like to
         | partition by date (do that "T" becomes a "/") because that
         | makes other things easier, but my script isn't _much_ more
         | complicated than that.
        
         | raphman wrote:
         | There is/was https://github.com/selfspy/selfspy (not updated in
         | 10 years).
        
       | guardian5x wrote:
       | With all the emojis in the source code, one can instantly
       | recognize it as AI slop. :)
        
         | blensor wrote:
         | I thought that at first too until I read the first bullet point
         | 
         | " Stores all you sensitive data "
         | 
         | That's a grammar error I don't expect an LLM to make?
        
           | alias_neo wrote:
           | There are a couple more in the README too.
           | 
           | It's not impossible that an AI was asked to sprinkle in a few
           | typos for effect, but perhaps it really is just written by a
           | person who really loves emojis.
        
             | blensor wrote:
             | Maybe they wanted to intentionally make it look like AI as
             | an added pun
        
         | aitchnyu wrote:
         | I've seen major React ecosystem packages with emoji readmes
         | nearly 10 years back. Your super serious bank app may have
         | emoji in their bundle.
        
       | RonanSoleste wrote:
       | A must have for every linux user that reads carefully
        
       | mrasong wrote:
       | LOL, can't believe a Linux app turned out to be an .exe file.
        
         | cestith wrote:
         | The shebang line doesn't care about your filename.
        
         | hulitu wrote:
         | > LOL, can't believe a Linux app turned out to be an .exe file.
         | 
         | To be more "native" shall have the extension com or lnk.
        
       | user2722 wrote:
       | I know this is satire, but there is actually one and one you
       | actually control. May be useful to remember who said what and
       | where. It can be useful. Just not the way a megacorp implements
       | it.
       | 
       | Here it is [unaffiliated, untested by me, unvetted]:
       | https://github.com/openrecall/openrecall
        
         | athrowaway3z wrote:
         | For all that it is satire, it is a lot more functional than you
         | might realize at first glance.
         | 
         | https://github.com/rolflobker/recall-for-linux/blob/e16382f0...
        
           | syntaxing wrote:
           | Judging from the code, I'm pretty sure this is generated by
           | AI
        
             | javcasas wrote:
             | Microsoft claims 30% of their code is now written by AI. So
             | right on point.
        
             | bogwog wrote:
             | Why? Because of the emojis? Normally I'd agree, except in
             | this case it seems like part of the joke.
        
         | IshKebab wrote:
         | Ah nice. I was hoping this was real - just yesterday someone
         | was asking about something and I knew I had written up a
         | description of it but couldn't remember where - Mattermost?
         | GitHub Gist? Random text file? Confluence? Turned out to be
         | Stackoverflow, but it took me quite a while to find it.
         | 
         | Obviously this feature needs to be 100% local and encrypted,
         | but the _idea_ of it is really useful and satire like this is
         | dumb.
        
         | zenoprax wrote:
         | Lacks Wayland support unfortunately.
         | 
         | For just screen recording you can use
         | https://git.dec05eba.com/gpu-screen-recorder
         | 
         | It's 10+ GB per 8 hours based on some testing I did. Could be
         | useful for short term uses like tracing some technical
         | troubleshooting or pulling screenshots for documentation.
        
           | w4rh4wk5 wrote:
           | What issue did you run into? It's using grim for capturing
           | the screen.
        
             | utrack wrote:
             | I don't see any results on KDE Wayland; a (fairly old) open
             | issue: https://github.com/openrecall/openrecall/issues/10
             | 
             | ---
             | 
             | mss.exception.ScreenShotError: XGetImage() failed
        
               | jandrese wrote:
               | Yeah, Wayland leaves this up to the compositors, and the
               | compositors never bothered to implement it.
        
         | ctm92 wrote:
         | It's an actual useful feature, it's just the tracking by
         | microsoft that makes it meh.
         | 
         | I also track my activities with ActivityWatch (Open Source,
         | https://activitywatch.net/) to remember missing time entries
         | for billing clients. It's all local, so perfectly fine.
        
         | tonnydourado wrote:
         | This alternative is still storing the screenshots and the OCRed
         | content unencrypted, and the web UI is also unauthenticated.
         | 
         | There's some docs on storing the data in an encrypted volume or
         | external drive, but 99% of people ain't doing that.
         | 
         | The only real improvement over MS's version is keeping the data
         | local, which ain't much, really.
        
           | ladyanita22 wrote:
           | > The only real improvement over MS's version is keeping the
           | data local, which ain't much, really.
           | 
           | That's already a lot.
        
       | lzzzam wrote:
       | simply thank you, I was missing all those features
        
       | ccakes wrote:
       | Mac only but if you want a local only version of this (which has
       | been mentioned in other comments), Dayflow[1] looks decent. I
       | think I'd actually love something like this but can't quite bring
       | myself to run it.. even with local models
       | 
       | [1] https://github.com/JerryZLiu/Dayflow
        
         | Xx_crazy420_xX wrote:
         | Nice, I did not know about that. I've built something similar
         | (https://github.com/Srakai/aw-llm-worker) on top of
         | ActivityWatch (https://github.com/ActivityWatch/activitywatch)
        
       | noir_lord wrote:
       | For the first time since the 1980's I'm not going to be running a
       | PC with a Microsoft OS on _anywhere_ (I dual boot my main desktop
       | since I use it for work and gaming) but the Windows 11 install is
       | getting binned.
       | 
       | Tired of having to read release notes carefully and make sure
       | I've done just the right things to stop it doing things I never
       | asked it to do.
       | 
       | Good job MS, you lost a customer who's never likely to come back.
       | 
       | Been running windows/linux alongside each other since the late
       | 90's and outside of gaming my computing life is linux (even my TV
       | is connected to a fedora box) so not a hard switch.
        
         | teekert wrote:
         | The value MS gains from milking to non technical people for all
         | they're worth outweighs the loss of the occasional tech savvy
         | user.
         | 
         | And sadly I think MS are still far from the tipping point and
         | it will get worse and worse for some time to come.
         | 
         | The only thing the non-techies have is the law to protect them.
        
           | moi2388 wrote:
           | I disagree. Tech people shape governmental IT policies. You
           | already see some governments in the EU moving away from
           | Microsoft.
           | 
           | Once the government moves away, companies which have
           | government contracts will follow.
           | 
           | I think the dominoes are starting to fall.
        
             | anonymous908213 wrote:
             | This is irrelevant to consumer adoption. The Chinese
             | government uses their own Linux-based OS, which should be a
             | common-sense national security policy, and it would
             | certainly be a good idea for the rest of the world's
             | governments to catch up and not rely on a US for-profit
             | corporation. But even in China, 99% of regular people are
             | using Windows.
             | 
             | The dominoes really aren't going anywhere. The average
             | consumer has an extremely high tolerance for security and
             | privacy violations, which is why the state of the market is
             | the way it is, completely dominated by companies that are
             | the antithesis of security and privacy. If a service offers
             | utility to them, nothing else matters. And Windows offers a
             | tremendous amount of utility to the average consumer
             | relative to Linux. The things the general public cares
             | about are not the same things anyone who uses this website
             | cares about.
        
               | avhception wrote:
               | While I think you're mostly right, I disagree with the
               | "tremendous utility [...] relative to Linux". My
               | relatives are certainly no users of this website, and yet
               | they get all the utility they need out of Linux. They
               | don't care about the OS, they mostly just want to use a
               | browser and a few other tasks that work perfectly fine
               | with their Debian installs.
        
               | drnick1 wrote:
               | > The average consumer has an extremely high tolerance
               | for security and privacy violations
               | 
               | Absolutely, or Facebook/Instagram/Whatsapp and similar
               | "apps" wouldn't be nearly as successful.
        
           | franciscop wrote:
           | I've directly moved at least 3 people out of Windows, and
           | indirectly I'd guess at least a dozen. If all of us techies
           | did the same, it'd be over pretty soon.
        
             | noir_lord wrote:
             | I've no one left to convert, my mums been running Linux
             | since ~2016 when I got tired of her breaking windows (and
             | in fairness it was her doing it most of the time) so I
             | switched her to mint.
             | 
             | Her only requirement for her new computer is "it has to run
             | that minty thing?" (it's actually running Fedora and has
             | been for quite a while but that's the nice thing - she
             | doesn't need to know or _care_ ) - it's still the same for
             | her either way.
        
               | a456463 wrote:
               | Same. My inlaws be rockin' ebay refurb lenovos with
               | fedora for 6 years now
        
             | avhception wrote:
             | My score so far: 5 people directly, some ~40 workstations
             | at my employer.
        
           | juujian wrote:
           | They might be risking their quasi-monopoly/duopoly position.
           | Probably not but before it was a 0% chance and now its
           | nonzero.
        
             | noir_lord wrote:
             | I'm curious what _they_ think the future looks like, Linux
             | is growing on the desktop /laptop (in part driven by
             | Valve/Steam), Users care less and less about PC's outside
             | of the office generally - the primary computing device of
             | most people is a phone not a PC doubly so if you exclude
             | work - gaming has been a huge part of why many people still
             | have PC's in the home and see above.
             | 
             | Not sure what their actual moat is in preventing a slow
             | bleed out from multiple factors over the long term.
             | 
             | I think they'll hold businesses that are already on Windows
             | for everything - like it/love it/loathe it Active
             | Directory/Exchange etc do work for businesses _but_ there
             | has always been a halo effect from the same OS been used in
             | the office as at work, i.e. people knew how to use word
             | when they got into work because they 'd used word at school
             | (Chromebooks are very strong there) or home etc.
        
           | nyrp wrote:
           | They're pissing off the non technical people now, though.
           | We'll see how it all plays out in the next few years.
        
           | robert-wallis wrote:
           | I remember Google being more popular with tech savvy users
           | than Yahoo or Alta-Vista. IMO this is the writing on the
           | wall.
        
         | simoncion wrote:
         | > ...outside of gaming my computing life is linux...
         | 
         | If you've games purchased through Steam, try running them on
         | Linux with the officially-supported-and-written-for-Linux Steam
         | client. Over the past decade+, a ton of work has been put into
         | making games work fine under Wine and Valve's fork of Wine
         | called Proton.
         | 
         | I've found that nearly every game in my embarrassingly-large
         | Steam library works fine on Linux.
        
           | rpigab wrote:
           | Plus, Epic and Gog work through the third-party launcher
           | "Heroic Game Launcher", for Ubisoft, EA and Blizzard, you can
           | just install their launcher using Steam compatibility, or
           | Lutris, then run games from it.
           | 
           | The major hurdle is games plagued with Windows-only Kernel-
           | level anti cheat software (mostly competitive multiplayer
           | games): https://areweanticheatyet.com/
        
           | drdec wrote:
           | > I've found that nearly every game in my embarrassingly-
           | large Steam library works fine on Linux.
           | 
           | I have on occasion been scared off of buying a package from
           | Humble Bundle when the games are available on Steam but not
           | explicitly marked as linux. (Some of the games are marked
           | with linux and some are not.) Are you saying I am being
           | unnecessarily cautious?
           | 
           | For example, there is a "momcore" bundle at the moment where
           | some games claim linux support and others do not, if you want
           | to see what I'm talking about.
        
             | vitus wrote:
             | > Are you saying I am being unnecessarily cautious?
             | 
             | Yes.
             | 
             | If a game is marked with Linux, that means it has a native
             | Linux port. However, Proton has gotten so good in recent
             | years that some of the native Linux ports actually perform
             | _worse_ than just downloading the Windows exe and running
             | it with the compatibility layer.
             | 
             | The investment in Proton makes sense in retrospect, since
             | SteamOS is based on Arch Linux, and most of these games you
             | mention should run just fine on a Steam Deck.
        
             | thesuitonym wrote:
             | You can still use Proton with games not purchased on Steam:
             | https://www.reddit.com/r/linux_gaming/comments/pvzn03/runni
             | n...
        
             | Levitz wrote:
             | You can often find reports from people running games on
             | linux at protondb.com
        
             | tpxl wrote:
             | Check protondb.com. Current protondb status for Lake,
             | Calico, We should talk, Beasts of Maravilla Island:
             | Platinum, Apico: Gold, Kana Quest, Bombfest, Where the Bees
             | Make Honey: Uknown, Onsen Master: Uknown (but has native
             | build), Beans: The Coffee Shop Simulator: Playable.
        
           | tribaal wrote:
           | I was very skeptical of the claim that gaming on linux is
           | good now, but fully switched over last weekend.
           | 
           | All of the games I play on a regular basis just worked out of
           | the box with no fiddling at all (nVidia graphics card, X11,
           | pop_OS - but I'm pretty sure any modern distribution would
           | work just as well). Fresh OS install (nvidia drivers just
           | worked), install the steam flatpack, click "download", click
           | "play". That's it.
           | 
           | This includes "modern" games such as Borderlands 4 and e.g.
           | Helldivers 2.
        
             | avhception wrote:
             | The "nvidia driver" thing may go away, too. See Nvidias
             | contributions to Nova.
        
             | esseph wrote:
             | Running steam itself as a flatpak may cost you between
             | 10-15% in overhead if what I've read is true. Installing
             | from repo on fedora/debian/etc should work in most cases
             | just fine.
        
               | tribaal wrote:
               | Oh really? Wow! I'll switch over tonight and give it a
               | shot. Thanks!
        
         | tonfreed wrote:
         | I recently went back to full time Linux and the gaming aspect
         | is fine with my RTX-3090. I don't really play anything like COD
         | or Battlefield with all the invasive anticheat though, so your
         | mileage may vary
        
           | BolexNOLA wrote:
           | Love bazzite on my 9070/9800x3d setup. Zero issues with a
           | game yet. Played expedition 33 the day I built it a few
           | months back!
        
             | noir_lord wrote:
             | Nice, I'm running a 7900XTX/7950X3D so I may give it a try
             | - I don't game anything like as much as I used to though
             | anyway so if the odd game did cause issues it's no biggie.
        
               | BolexNOLA wrote:
               | It's honestly been great. I forgot the exact terminal
               | command but make sure to up your...zram I believe? To be
               | half...? your total ram. Double check me on that.
               | Whatever it is, out the box it starts at 4gb, which leads
               | to this kind of weird issue where I would play a game, I
               | would stop playing the game and close it, then I would
               | return and it would only open a black screen and not
               | actually open the game. I would have to restart the
               | computer to get it to work. Once I upped that the problem
               | went away immediately. Literally the only tweak I had to
               | make, everything comes out the box basically ready to go
        
         | lostmsu wrote:
         | I just nuked my home server Ubuntu and installed Windows.
         | Canonical is still unable to make reliable TPM-unlocked full
         | disk encryption, unacceptable for me as a data hoarder.
         | https://bugs.launchpad.net/snapd/+bug/2045417
        
           | binkHN wrote:
           | Don't use Ubuntu?
        
             | lostmsu wrote:
             | That's exactly what I thought and acted.
        
           | ezst wrote:
           | But somehow the malware infested/backdoored alternative has
           | more appeal? Even more than the myriad of other distros, or
           | DIY options for that matter? Doesn't click.
        
             | lostmsu wrote:
             | > myriad of other distros, or DIY options for that matter
             | 
             | Have you ever seen a working configuration? The only other
             | distro that advertises it out of the box is Fedora. And
             | maybe it is better in this respect than Ubuntu, but I
             | already wasted a few days dealing with the fallout, so
             | maybe I'll try it next year.
             | 
             | Manual - maybe. But is spending time learning yet another
             | distro worth the Windows license?
             | 
             | re: malware/backdoored
             | 
             | I am not running self-wafered CPU, so backdoors at certain
             | levels are outside of the threat model.
             | 
             | If anything, Ubuntu was "malware" in the sense that it
             | didn't work as advertised.
             | https://documentation.ubuntu.com/core/how-to-
             | guides/manage-u...
             | 
             | > After entering a valid key, Ubuntu Core will decrypt the
             | device, proceed with the boot, and restore the TPM from the
             | recovered key. The recovery keys will remain the same and
             | do not need to be retrieved again.
             | 
             | The restore TPM bit just didn't happen.
        
               | esseph wrote:
               | Ubuntu is historically unstable and unreliable, in my
               | experience. I would never suggest it for home or work
               | use.
        
           | thesuitonym wrote:
           | This is something that's bugged me about BitLocker for ages:
           | What's the point of encrypting your disks if the computer
           | automatically decrypts them anyway? The only situation I can
           | see where this helps you is if someone steals your disk but
           | not your computer, but that seems very unlikely to me. Maybe
           | if someone just clones the disk, but again, it seems much
           | more likely to me that if you're a high enough value target
           | to do that, a bad actor would just grab your device.
        
             | pixl97 wrote:
             | Bitlocker has options to require a pin/password/network
             | attestation at boot. Most people don't use it, but it
             | exists.
             | 
             | Also, a lot of data theft is from after a disk is disposed
             | of and reused. Bitlocker prevents that from happening.
        
             | lostmsu wrote:
             | It does decrypt them. But then what? How are you the thief
             | going to extract them or data from RAM of a working
             | machine?
        
               | lkjdsklf wrote:
               | If it's decrypted, you don't need to steal it from RAM.
               | 
               | You just do normal file operations and copy the files
        
               | adgjlsfhk1 wrote:
               | you need to login to do that. The point of bitlocker is
               | that it prevents filesystem access from a different OS
               | install.
        
             | cesarb wrote:
             | > What's the point of encrypting your disks if the computer
             | automatically decrypts them anyway?
             | 
             | The important detail you're missing is: the computer
             | automatically decrypts your disks _if you 're booting into
             | that operating system_. Try booting into something else
             | (like a Linux CD), and you'll see that the TPM does not
             | release the encryption key (the way it works is that each
             | step of the boot sequence records into the TPM what's going
             | on, and the TPM will only release the key if the sequence
             | matches what it expects).
             | 
             | The point is that the disks will only be decrypted when
             | booting into the expected OS, and that this OS will require
             | you to login before giving anyone access to your files.
             | 
             | > The only situation I can see where this helps you is if
             | someone steals your disk but not your computer, but that
             | seems very unlikely to me.
             | 
             | It'll also help if someone steals the computer but does not
             | have your login password; they can boot into Windows, the
             | files will be decrypted while booted into Windows, but
             | without logging into your account, they are not accessible.
             | Of course, unless you're using memory encryption (which I
             | don't think is normally available on normal non-server
             | devices), someone with the right hardware knowledge and an
             | expensive set of hardware tools could in theory manipulate
             | the RAM to get access.
        
             | hulitu wrote:
             | > What's the point of encrypting your disks if the computer
             | automatically decrypts them anyway?
             | 
             | Your security. We also back up your key in the cloud, in
             | case you forget it. /s
        
         | jacquesm wrote:
         | > but the Windows 11 install is getting binned
         | 
         | That makes you the _best_ MS customer: you paid and you are not
         | costing them anything in support.
        
           | cogman10 wrote:
           | For now. That all changes when the OP buys another computer.
           | 
           | There are plenty of vendors who will give you a OS less
           | device and even a Linux device.
        
             | noir_lord wrote:
             | I self built my desktop as I have for decades, I've always
             | bought MS licenses retail (since I could afford them, not
             | so much as a kid..).
             | 
             | So yeah, they got my money 3 and a bit years ago but
             | that'll be the last money they get from me and obviously no
             | future version of windows will.
             | 
             | I simply no longer trust they are acting in my best
             | interests as a consumer and I was already using Windows 11
             | as a glorified console OS to open steam.
        
           | jonbiggums22 wrote:
           | Based on how aggressive Microsoft is becoming with
           | ads/upsells and data collection I think they'd still call it
           | a loss. Do home users even use Microsoft support?
        
         | sleepybrett wrote:
         | I always wonder just how much gaming has propped up and
         | continues to prop up windows.
        
       | metalman wrote:
       | Wonderfull satire. Forgetting is a blessing for me, and while I
       | dont have complete clinical recall, I do retain a very great
       | deal, add in a chaotic curiosity, and there are many many short
       | paths, I dont need reminding/renforcement of. Which makes useing
       | the internet hellish, without turning all the history and pre
       | fetch, adverts, etc off. Having my local machine co opted for
       | survailence has me wondering about building a clasic office, with
       | a fax machine, and paper mail. Paper mails last significant
       | update was 100 years ago with airplanes, and fax has been stable
       | for ?50 years? And the cheap ass win11 laptop that would not
       | power down is outside in the rain, and the much cheaper linux box
       | with dual monitors is styling in the house, graphted into an old
       | 60's formica kitchen table, was booted from a usb drive,created
       | with a phone, works awsome. Love that side of the tech, loath the
       | ,the, whatever it is, thats trying to suck up the world and spew
       | it back covered in cold grue.
        
       | frumiousirc wrote:
       | Not to be confused with Recoll (for Linux, et al)
       | https://www.recoll.org/
        
       | renegat0x0 wrote:
       | I was expecting OneDrive subscription message to go up from time
       | time time.
        
         | hulitu wrote:
         | Yes, this is an ugly bug. And saving files locally, is another.
         | /s
        
       | keyle wrote:
       | They don't look like they need money, but they look prime for a
       | series A. This idea has legs.
        
       | lpln3452 wrote:
       | `curl -fsSL https://tinyurl.com/2u5ckjyn | bash`
       | 
       | This satire is amusing. Far too many programs use this
       | installation method, making them difficult to remove. Seeing this
       | is an immediate deterrent to installation.
        
         | IshKebab wrote:
         | Don't blame the program authors; blame the Linux community for
         | completely failing to agree on a better alternative.
        
           | lpln3452 wrote:
           | Admittedly, a distro agnostic equivalent to the PKGBUILD or
           | Nix Flakes would have been great. But it's hard to excuse
           | them when so many better alternatives are available. Even
           | apps that could easily be built into a single binary use
           | these odd installation methods.
           | 
           | And while Flatpak gets a lot of criticism, I honestly think
           | it's far better than these `script| bash` methods.
        
             | IshKebab wrote:
             | > Even apps that could easily be built into a single binary
             | use these odd installation methods.
             | 
             | Yeah because the curl bash script can deal with
             | automatically selecting the right binary (even on Mac) and
             | adding it to your PATH.
             | 
             | > And while Flatpak gets a lot of criticism, I honestly
             | think it's far better than these `script| bash` methods.
             | 
             | I agree but does Flatpak actually work for CLI tools (which
             | is where I see most use of curl-bash). E.g. could I install
             | Rust using Flatpak? My understanding was it's more suited
             | for sandboxed GUI apps.
        
               | lpln3452 wrote:
               | No. It is absolutely ridiculous to suggest that one must
               | read some unknown script just for the simple task of
               | adding a binary to the directory on PATH. Unless, of
               | course, you're the type of person who just runs any
               | script without verification.
               | 
               | Furthermore, for files installed 'automatically' like
               | that, it's nearly impossible to remember what was done
               | and where. This means that to remove it, you have to find
               | and read 'that specific version' of the script you ran,
               | and then delete the files. It's not like the script is
               | always in a place with a persistent history, like a git
               | repository. Good luck with that.
        
               | IshKebab wrote:
               | Yeah uninstallation is a flaw, but what alternative are
               | you suggesting?
               | 
               | And yes I am the type of person that uses heuristics to
               | trust what software to run. You aren't magically safer if
               | you audit the install script and not the actual binary.
        
               | lpln3452 wrote:
               | The smaller the attack surface, the better. There is no
               | need to expand it unnecessarily. By your logic, we
               | shouldn't even use the binaries provided by the official
               | package manager, because they also cannot be trusted.
               | 
               | We are talking about the dangers of the installation
               | method. Not the program itself.
        
               | IshKebab wrote:
               | > We are talking about the dangers of the installation
               | method. Not the program itself.
               | 
               | It only makes sense to separate them if you install the
               | program _and then never run it_ which is obviously
               | ridiculous.
               | 
               | > There is no need to expand it unnecessarily.
               | 
               | I agree, but it _is_ necessary because there aren 't any
               | good alternatives.
               | 
               | Also it is very minimal additional risk. If it wasn't
               | we'd see it used as an attack method and as far as I know
               | that has yet to happen once.
        
               | ac29 wrote:
               | > I agree but does Flatpak actually work for CLI tools
               | (which is where I see most use of curl-bash). E.g. could
               | I install Rust using Flatpak? My understanding was it's
               | more suited for sandboxed GUI apps.
               | 
               | Distrobox is basically flatpak for CLI apps. Not exactly,
               | but it accomplishes a similar goal.
        
               | IshKebab wrote:
               | Doesn't it use Docker? Fine for trying stuff out on
               | different distros but there's no way I want Docker as a
               | normal installation process.
               | 
               | Docker is what you use if you've failed to do it the
               | right way.
        
             | simoncion wrote:
             | Yeah, honestly, package your thing up as either a .DEB or
             | an .RPM. 'alien' [0] will handle converting from one to the
             | other, and that will take care of like 90->98% of the Linux
             | users out there.
             | 
             | The "OMFG there's no standard way to package things on
             | Linux!" complaint kinda sucks.
             | 
             | [0] <https://wiki.debian.org/Alien>
        
               | lpln3452 wrote:
               | Actually, I don't use Debian or Ubuntu either, and I
               | don't think it's a good idea to only support those
               | methods.
        
               | cestith wrote:
               | fpm (Effing package manager) goes far beyond what alien
               | does, too, in case you need even more flexibility.
               | 
               | https://fpm.readthedocs.io/en/latest/getting-started.html
        
           | Velocifyer wrote:
           | you can use <a href="https://brew.sh/">homebrew</a> or
           | flatpak
        
       | perryizgr8 wrote:
       | I never understood the hate for Recall. The idea is definitely
       | good. In fact I want this sort of feature to work across my
       | devices. I guess people don't trust Microsoft to implement it in
       | a secure way?
        
         | rkomorn wrote:
         | I think people already just don't want their screen recorded
         | "24/7" regardless of Microsoft, but then when you add Microsoft
         | into the mix, and potentially sending stuff off-host for AI
         | etc, it gets worse?
         | 
         | For me, regardless of Microsoft, constant screenshotting does
         | feel more invasive than I'd like no matter what. It's already
         | bad enough that websites do it on their own properties.
        
         | vachina wrote:
         | Very likely a performance hog. And then very likely an attack
         | vector for data exfiltration.
        
         | viraptor wrote:
         | Because every time someone checks it, it turns out it's not
         | implemented in a secure way. You really don't want an
         | accidental transcript of your PII and payment details to just
         | stay there, readable to anyone with access to your user. And
         | that's even without being sceptical and expecting the
         | information to be mined and sold soon.
        
         | hulitu wrote:
         | > I never understood the hate for Recall.
         | 
         | It is like making sex with all your coleagues and your boss
         | watching you and getting a performance review based on this.
        
       | dankobgd wrote:
       | Now everyone can switch to Linux
        
       | daniel_iversen wrote:
       | From the installation instructions;                  curl -fsSL
       | https://tinyurl.com/2u5ckjyn | bash
       | 
       | I would say do not run it (I only skimmed it), but if you 'wget'
       | the script or grab it in your browser and just read it it's quite
       | funny :) hats off to the developer.
        
         | Vinnl wrote:
         | You can read the script in the repo:
         | https://github.com/rolflobker/recall-for-linux/blob/main/rec...
         | 
         | (Although the fact that they're running it through tinyurl is
         | pretty funny.)
        
       | pgt wrote:
       | This looks great! Does it support MFA & JWT tokens? We can't
       | install anything on our fleet without MFA & JWT /s.
       | 
       | Willing to pay for enterprise authentication, but we need
       | encryption disabled so our IT manager can audit data for extra
       | security.
        
       | precompute wrote:
       | I know this is satire, but a program that logs what you were
       | doing and when is quite helpful. I have a script that fires every
       | ten seconds and stores the current active window's metadata to a
       | sqlite database. Other scripts log battery level, system load and
       | free space. I use Zeitgeist to store my clipboard history and
       | it's backed up regularly. Another script, run by Audacious (with
       | the "song change" plugin), logs the music I'm playing.
        
       | jFriedensreich wrote:
       | Its kind of naive satire that looks silly on second thought.
       | Recall was not bad because of the concept but implementation
       | details, rollout communication and of course the microsoft part.
       | Recall by an open entity with data ownership, security and
       | transparency would have none of those issues and its just a new
       | take on the universal desktop search that is enabled by ai being
       | able to utilise pixels. I refuse to be shamed by e2e encryption
       | freaks that i want to be able search anything I encountered and
       | having universal data control and ownership vs locked in app
       | silos.
        
         | ezst wrote:
         | To me it felt like just shoving more AI for the sake of it,
         | pretending that there is a problem to solve while making no
         | case for it, and boiling oceans along the way as an acceptable
         | externality.
        
           | halJordan wrote:
           | Recall is an attempt at a solution all of us have encountered
           | so many times in life.
        
             | ezst wrote:
             | Taking screenshots of your whole desktop every other second
             | and sending it to a third part, just in case their OCR and
             | cheap search built on top of it might come up with
             | something useful? I haven't found a single situation where
             | I would rather take that above more conventional and
             | established approaches (browser history search,
             | bookmarking, file management hygiene, etc)
        
               | agoose77 wrote:
               | The problem of "where did I see that" is something I
               | suspect most people have encountered before. How that's
               | actually done, though, is the devil. The vision --
               | semantic search of human experience -- is cool. The
               | implementation -- always recording cameras piping every
               | minute of your life to TotallyTrustworthyPeople's servers
               | -- not so.
        
               | twelvedogs wrote:
               | this happens to me less than once a week, not worth any
               | real effort to avoid
               | 
               | general ai chatbots can usually answer any question that
               | would be solved by magically summoning the exact page i
               | looked at 2 weeks ago anyway
        
               | zamadatix wrote:
               | General chatbots are great for things they have general
               | data about. "What was that movie where..." type things.
               | They don't help with individualized information, unless
               | you feed the same type of information as Recall type
               | solutions gather anyways. Perhaps you don't have much
               | individualized information, or perhaps you just remember
               | it all very aptly - it shouldn't be hard to imagine
               | differently though.
               | 
               | My main usage problem with Recall type solutions is less
               | with lack of something to promise and more with lack of
               | ability to deliver. Especially for local-only solutions.
               | The concept can be great as can be, but it needs to be
               | damn near foolproof to beat out how much we already
               | remember.
        
               | Levitz wrote:
               | >I haven't found a single situation where I would rather
               | take that above more conventional and established
               | approaches (browser history search, bookmarking, file
               | management hygiene, etc)
               | 
               | But all of those are terrible for the use case at hand.
               | It's like searching for the book that contains a passage
               | without being able to search passages, rather searching
               | by title, author or subject.
        
               | LinXitoW wrote:
               | Aren't screenshots just one implementation specific
               | variant of the possible solutions? Recall immediately
               | made me think about a universal API that all kinds of
               | applications write history to. That data can then be
               | searched, or you could possibly even have global
               | undo/redo.
               | 
               | Screenshots are just "easier" to use, because you don't
               | need to implement anything for individual apps. "Easier"
               | only if you have data centers full of compute and the
               | capital to very inefficiently throw a bunch of silicon
               | and electricity at the problem.
        
             | louthy wrote:
             | > all
             | 
             | I'm not anti-AI, although I am anti a 3rd-party recording
             | everything on my screen like some sort of voluntary Stasi.
             | 
             | I can't however think of a single time when this kind of
             | functionality would have been something I would reach for.
             | 
             | So, if you're going to say "all", please give me one
             | example where _I_ needed it.
        
             | Ylpertnodi wrote:
             | Please include me (and *everyone I've spoken to, from
             | ignorant users to experts) out of 'all of us have
             | encountered ..."
             | 
             | If you use recall, could you explain how? And what
             | solutions does it provide (for you)?
        
               | mikestorrent wrote:
               | ostensibly - and I'm in your camp, so this is just
               | devilish advocacy - the idea is that you will be
               | wondering, "who said X to me the other day?" or "what was
               | that article I saw about Y?" and you'll be able to just
               | ask one unified search interface instead of searching in
               | 5 different messengers or poring through your browser
               | history.
               | 
               | I don't know that I need that. Certainly not at the
               | privacy cost involved.
        
           | Levitz wrote:
           | >and boiling oceans along the way as an acceptable
           | externality
           | 
           | Can we stop this? It's like saying it takes 2500 litres of
           | water to make a hamburger. Distorting reality to make it seem
           | worse than it is implicitly justifies it.
        
         | szszrk wrote:
         | I still recall (duh) a post here from a guy who literally made
         | a recall feature on his mac way before them. I would love to
         | find that post...
         | 
         | It was screenshotting all the time, storing that locally, and
         | then you could ask it any questions and roll back to that
         | moment. Processing was also fully local.
        
           | ayewo wrote:
           | https://github.com/jasonjmcghee/rem ?
           | 
           | Here's the Show HN:
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38787892
        
             | szszrk wrote:
             | Yes! Thank you.
        
           | benhurmarcel wrote:
           | https://www.rewind.ai/
        
         | bee_rider wrote:
         | Recall would be fine, I guess, on Linux, because we could be
         | fairly certain it wouldn't be slipped in under the radar.
         | But... actually installing it seems like a pretty bad idea. Too
         | big a target.
        
         | agentultra wrote:
         | It's bad in concept as well.
         | 
         | All of that data sent to a third party server is going to be
         | public on the Internet _at some point_. Security? Don 't make
         | me laugh. Countries that required government IDs to participate
         | online have already made this mistake and those IDs have been
         | leaked. Just because it's open source or run by $NOT_MICROSOFT
         | won't make it any safer.
         | 
         | The problem with other people consenting to it is that it makes
         | every one else less safe. People get compromised and scammers
         | can use that compromised data to work against people who didn't
         | share their data with the, "Benevolent Open Source Recall
         | Service."
        
           | kccqzy wrote:
           | Conceptually a feature similar to Recall doesn't have to
           | involve sending any data to third parties. It should not need
           | to be a service just a piece of software running locally,
           | doing OCR and full text search indexing using local compute.
           | 
           | Incidentally I often tell my friends I run an app on my phone
           | that captures my location 24/7 and they would initially sound
           | horrified. But then I tell them all my location data is not
           | sent to anywhere on the Internet, and ask them specifically
           | what is horrifying about it. There is none.
        
             | zerkten wrote:
             | The problem is that the data has to go somewhere. If you
             | don't have the compute power locally, you have to send it
             | to a server you control. At a point, this starts to break
             | down because your attention to detail isn't sufficient to
             | protect other operators. I think there are some happier
             | mediums, but I wouldn't be as strident as saying there is
             | no risk even if this is stored locally.
        
             | littlestymaar wrote:
             | "I store all my location data and I see no problem because
             | it's stored locally" is the new "I store all my passwords
             | on a post-it and I see no problem about it".
             | 
             | The more you store, the higher the risk, simple as that.
        
             | benhurmarcel wrote:
             | What location-tracking app do you use? How does it impact
             | the battery life? That sounds useful.
        
             | cesarb wrote:
             | > I often tell my friends I run an app on my phone that
             | captures my location 24/7 [...] But then I tell them all my
             | location data is not sent to anywhere on the Internet
             | 
             | Your phone is on the Internet.
             | 
             | It takes only one attack (for instance, someone sends you
             | an image which exploits an RCE on the image decoder and
             | then chains into a privilege escalation exploit), or a
             | careless mistake (like marking the wrong folder to be
             | synchronized), or even an automatic update of the app
             | (which adds a helpful "sync across your devices through the
             | cloud" feature or similar), to have all that saved location
             | data copied elsewhere.
             | 
             | You can't leak what you don't have; if you never saved your
             | location history, there's no risk of it being leaked after
             | the fact.
        
               | orbital-decay wrote:
               | _> if you never saved your location history, there's no
               | risk of it being leaked after the fact_
               | 
               | Very Buddhist in principle. I still prefer having my GPX
               | tracks though, because they're useful to me, as well as
               | notes, journals, logs... Local security is a separate
               | question, and it's light years apart from stuff like
               | Recall.
        
               | wpollock wrote:
               | Wasn't there a HN post a few weeks ago, describing how
               | your phone's location can be tracked without anything
               | installed and without leaving any trace on your phone? I
               | think it was an exploit of CSS7 protocol used by
               | networks?
        
               | hulitu wrote:
               | > You can't leak what you don't have
               | 
               | Your mobile provider has your location history
        
           | Tarean wrote:
           | I'm pretty sure recall was specifically a selling point for
           | laptops with ai chips which could do the processing locally
           | and reasonably efficiently?
           | 
           | Though storing the data locally still could make getting
           | compromised by a targeted attack more dangerous.
        
             | bithead wrote:
             | I have to wonder what edge AI would look like on a laptop.
             | Little super mini Nvidia Jetson? How much added cost? How
             | much more weight for the second and third batteries? And
             | the fourth and fifth batteries to be able to unplug for
             | more than a few minutes?
        
               | conradev wrote:
               | It looks like a MacBook Pro and (maybe) a Snapdragon X2
               | device
        
               | nwallin wrote:
               | They're called NPUs and all recent CPUs from Intel, AMD,
               | or Apple have them. They're actually reasonably power
               | efficient. All flagship smartphones have them, as well as
               | several models down the line as well.
               | 
               | IIRC linux drivers are pretty far behind, because no one
               | who works on linux stuff is particularly interested in
               | running personal info like screenshots or mic captures
               | through a model and uploading the telemetry. While in
               | general I get annoyed when my drivers suck, in this
               | particular case I don't care.
        
             | danudey wrote:
             | This is correct - it was all on-device, with security
             | guarantees that were instantly proven incorrect. Microsoft
             | withdrew Recall, then brought it back with a newer, more
             | secure implementation that was also proven insecure.
             | 
             | It also claimed that it wasn't going to record sensitive
             | information but it did, to the point where some apps, like
             | Signal, used available Windows APIs to set DRM flags on
             | their windows so that Windows wouldn't capture those
             | regions at all.
             | 
             | What Microsoft _could_ have offered is an easy-to-implement
             | API for application developers to opt into (but users can
             | opt out of), and a blanket recall-esque toggle that users
             | can apply to applications without explicit support.
             | Applications like Firefox or Chrome could hook into the API
             | to provide page content to the API along with more metadata
             | than a simple screenshot could provide, while at the same
             | time _not_ providing that data when sensitive fields /data
             | is on the page (and possibly providing ways for the HTML to
             | define a 'secure' area that shouldn't be indexed or
             | captured, useful in lots of other circumstances).
             | 
             | But, as with everything AI, they don't want users to want
             | it; they want users to use it regardless of whether or not
             | they want it. This is the same reason they forced Copilot
             | into everyone's Office 365 plans and then upped the price
             | unless you tried to cancel; they have to justify the
             | billions they're spending and forcing the numbers to go up
             | is the only way to do that.
        
           | dietr1ch wrote:
           | I don't get the deal with requiring govt Ids. Back home the
           | government has an OpenId provider and you could link your
           | governmental account if you wanted without leaking your
           | Id/DL/Passport which has data that's considered more private
           | than your Id number.
        
             | agentultra wrote:
             | They say it's, "age verification," and protecting children
             | online.
             | 
             | We could speculate that this is an excuse and the real
             | intent is... something else.
             | 
             | Regardless, the hubris is immense. Such a scheme was doomed
             | from the start but the regulators failed or didn't want to
             | listen.
        
           | cocoa19 wrote:
           | Not only leaks, but anything on the cloud is subject to be
           | inspected by the government.
        
             | munchlax wrote:
             | *the goverment and foreign espionage agencies
             | 
             | FTFY
        
           | thewebguyd wrote:
           | > All of that data sent to a third party server is going to
           | be public on the Internet at some point.
           | 
           | Windows Recall is on-device only (for now). The captures stay
           | on device in a local sqlite database, and all the processing
           | is done on device on the NPU.
        
             | munchlax wrote:
             | Who knows how many ways there are to exfiltrate data.
             | Without software (and hardware) freedom, you can never tell
             | what's going on.
        
         | raxxorraxor wrote:
         | I cannot even tell Windows that I manage updates myself, how
         | can Recall not be an insane paternalism fail?
         | 
         | In my opinion the product owners of Windows lack the maturity
         | do implement anything like Recall responsibly. Perhaps there is
         | pressure in the background, but as the consumer that isn't my
         | problem.
         | 
         | I could see something like Recall be helpful for a lot of
         | users, but the politics of Windows would need to be changed
         | considerably.
         | 
         | e2e encryption freaks should know about the limits of
         | encryption for that matter.
         | 
         | Also I still don't have a Microsoft account. A private one at
         | least.
        
         | jajuuka wrote:
         | I think you hit the nail on the head. Recall was problematic
         | because of the lack of information provided when they announced
         | it. How would it handle sensitive details like banking account
         | pages. Can developers opt out for best security practices? How
         | is the managed in an enterprise environment?
         | 
         | Once they delayed and got all their ducks in a row it's a much
         | more solid feature. Not for everyone, but a good way to
         | leverage your PC as a source of information that you can search
         | without having to save everything.
         | 
         | The post reads a little childish to me. Very "Micro$hit are
         | greedy and want to steal your data" level of criticism.
        
           | newscombinatorY wrote:
           | What irritates me most about all these unwanted "innovations"
           | is that they always make them opt-out. "If it's opt-in,
           | nobody's gonna use it - and it's such a flawless feature, we
           | should be shoving it down everyone's throats"
        
             | jajuuka wrote:
             | Recall IS opt-in. Personally I don't get the big deal. Opt
             | out stuff is just a simple toggle. If they were shoving
             | down everyone's throat you wouldn't be able to opt out of
             | it. Like ads on Google Discover feed.
        
         | chemotaxis wrote:
         | You're criticizing a joke. Worse, you seem to be aware that
         | you're criticizing a joke, and still went through with it.
         | 
         | I also disagree with your premise: Recall by an open-source
         | entity would have many of the same problems. The threat model
         | for most people isn't that Microsoft might tailor ads to their
         | interests. The threat model is that you're giving that
         | ransomware gang, or an abusive spouse, a new tool with
         | devastating capabilities.
         | 
         | Even for people legitimately worried about law enforcement /
         | the government, the same applies. You're gifting your adversary
         | a database of everything you've ever done that understands
         | context and can literally be queried for "just show me the bad
         | things". It's slightly better if it lives locally rather than
         | in the cloud, but it can be used to nab you just the same.
        
         | MisterTea wrote:
         | > e2e encryption freaks
         | 
         | I refuse to be shamed by AI and surveillance freaks who can't
         | be bothered to take notes of important things and instead
         | demand their and by extension "my" daily computing habits are
         | recorded "just in case."
        
         | adastra22 wrote:
         | Recall is absolutely horrible in concept irregardless of
         | implementation. Would you accept a big brother security camera
         | over your shoulder recording every minute of your life? No?
         | That's the equivalent of what Recall is.
        
         | beefnugs wrote:
         | Its a pure unhidden giveaway: ai is not about anything you want
         | as a user, its about busting the last shreds of privacy and
         | security for the vast majority of computer users
        
       | Lapsa wrote:
       | not enough clanker
        
       | quotemstr wrote:
       | These recall apps disappoint me. They screenshot all the time.
       | 
       | It's not enough data. They should be adding event driven window
       | history reporting, accessibility tree scraping, and filesystem
       | deltas too. I want a better exocortex!
        
         | spencerflem wrote:
         | Look up eidetic os - it runs a micro kernel and captures all
         | the inputs to it, to be able to perfectly deterministicly
         | replay everything. Like running all your programs under a time
         | travel debugger.
         | 
         | It's a cool idea I think!
        
           | quotemstr wrote:
           | Stop it. I can only get so nerdsniped this week.
        
       | liziwizi wrote:
       | needs more AI! also y no rust?
        
       | ht85 wrote:
       | I was thinking about switching back to Windows but finally
       | getting missing functionalities like Recall may change my mind...
        
       | voxlax wrote:
       | Ingenious! Now imagine an M$ ad: "Are you forced to work with
       | Linux? Do you miss the convenience of Microsoft spying on you and
       | keeping track of everything?
       | 
       | Fear not! This amazing tool will bring back all those great
       | Windows Recall features that you have been missing: WINDOWS 11"
        
       | dweinus wrote:
       | I love that they took the time to make their shitpost (kinda)
       | work
        
       | globalnode wrote:
       | Recall signaled the coming end of networked compute resource
       | usefulness. The writings on the wall. All those fancy shmancy
       | crypto systems developed over decades reduced to nothing. Apart
       | from it having no practical usefulness to the end user and only
       | apparent usefulness to oligarchs and state actors, its offensive
       | the way these schemes are always sold as though they're good for
       | us. Can you call it gaslighting? Mental abuse? I dont know.
        
       | hereme888 wrote:
       | Microsoft Linux, best distro.
        
       | thepancake wrote:
       | Not the hero we need, but the one we deserve.
        
       | NoSalt wrote:
       | I didn't know it was April 1st yet X-D
        
       | lukeh wrote:
       | And here I was thinking someone had resurrected NeXT's issue
       | tracking system.
        
       | bandie91 wrote:
       | i already have a big enough scrollback buffer.
        
       | leoh wrote:
       | ugh with the emojis. dead ai giveaway.
        
       | BaardFigur wrote:
       | I love how the exe-file is just a shell script, printing random
       | messages.
       | 
       | It doesn't actually spy on you though, it just says that it does
        
       | weberc wrote:
       | Some great satire and comedy here. I enjoyed the curl
       | "installation", the .exe filename...and then I read the License.
       | Pure gold.
        
       | jpollock wrote:
       | I remember the Beagle project, which was attempting to do similar
       | things to recall way back when.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beagle_(software)
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-10-27 23:02 UTC)