Re: good freedom-respecting computer for running Debian

2023-03-23 Thread Lionel Élie Mamane
On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 06:05:48PM -0500, Nate Bargmann wrote: > * On 2023 22 Mar 14:06 -0500, Lionel Élie Mamane wrote: >> Well, I was trying to see if one could get reasonable hardware that >> doesn't have untrustable stuff like Intel ME and AMD PSP, (...) > I understand. I know there was a lo

Re: good freedom-respecting computer for running Debian

2023-03-22 Thread David
On Wed, 2023-03-22 at 23:59 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > I understand.  I know there was a lot of speculation about it a > > couple > > years back or so but has it been conclusively determined that it > > acts in > > any nefarious manner? > > AFAIK the information necessary to be able to asses

Re: good freedom-respecting computer for running Debian

2023-03-22 Thread Stefan Monnier
> I understand. I know there was a lot of speculation about it a couple > years back or so but has it been conclusively determined that it acts in > any nefarious manner? AFAIK the information necessary to be able to assess whether it may act in a nefarious manner (or not) is missing. As poor pe

Re: good freedom-respecting computer for running Debian

2023-03-22 Thread Nate Bargmann
* On 2023 22 Mar 14:06 -0500, Lionel Élie Mamane wrote: > On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 05:11:17AM -0500, Nate Bargmann wrote: > > Why have you ruled out a system with an integrated Intel GPU? > > Well, I was trying to see if one could get reasonable hardware that > doesn't have untrustable stuff like I

Re: good freedom-respecting computer for running Debian

2023-03-22 Thread der.hans
Am 21. Mar, 2023 schwätzte Teemu Likonen so: moin moin, * 2023-03-21 00:02:10+0100, Lionel Élie Mamane wrote: Is there any good low-hassle freedom-respecting reasonable price reasonable performance computer platform for running Debian these days? Maybe from Tuxedo: https://www.tuxedocompute

Re: good freedom-respecting computer for running Debian

2023-03-22 Thread Teemu Likonen
* 2023-03-22 20:05:21+0100, Lionel Élie Mamane wrote: > Well, I was trying to see if one could get reasonable hardware that > doesn't have untrustable stuff like Intel ME and AMD PSP, and in > integrated Intel GPU requires an Intel CPU and thus having an Intel > ME... "Reasonable" is vague but he

Re: good freedom-respecting computer for running Debian

2023-03-22 Thread Lionel Élie Mamane
On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 05:11:17AM -0500, Nate Bargmann wrote: > Why have you ruled out a system with an integrated Intel GPU? Well, I was trying to see if one could get reasonable hardware that doesn't have untrustable stuff like Intel ME and AMD PSP, and in integrated Intel GPU requires an Intel

Re: good freedom-respecting computer for running Debian

2023-03-22 Thread Nate Bargmann
Why have you ruled out a system with an integrated Intel GPU? I've been quite satisfied with the integrated Intel GPUs for quite some time. They work well with the compositors in Xfce and GNOME. They don't seem to have any issues with XScreensaver's 3D modules. This is the extent of my 3D experi

Re: good freedom-respecting computer for running Debian

2023-03-21 Thread Stefan Monnier
>>> Is there any good low-hassle freedom-respecting reasonable price >>> reasonable performance computer platform for running Debian these >> Define your notion of "reasonable" for price and for performance. > Performance-wise, for the laptop, I'd like aptitude not to compute > (search for a depend

Re: good freedom-respecting computer for running Debian

2023-03-21 Thread Teemu Likonen
* 2023-03-21 00:02:10+0100, Lionel Élie Mamane wrote: > Is there any good low-hassle freedom-respecting reasonable price > reasonable performance computer platform for running Debian these > days? Maybe from Tuxedo: https://www.tuxedocomputers.com/en/why-TUXEDO.tuxedo (I don't own Tuxedo compute

Re: good freedom-respecting computer for running Debian

2023-03-21 Thread Lionel Élie Mamane
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 09:33:26PM -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote: >> Is there any good low-hassle freedom-respecting reasonable price >> reasonable performance computer platform for running Debian these > Define your notion of "reasonable" for price and for performance. Performance-wise, for the la

Re: good freedom-respecting computer for running Debian

2023-03-20 Thread Ramces Tampo-og Red
On 2023-03-21 09:55, Timothy M Butterworth wrote: On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 9:34 PM Stefan Monnier wrote: > Is there any good low-hassle freedom-respecting reasonable price > reasonable performance computer platform for running Debian these Define your notion of "reasonable" for price and for

Re: good freedom-respecting computer for running Debian

2023-03-20 Thread Timothy M Butterworth
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 9:34 PM Stefan Monnier wrote: > > Is there any good low-hassle freedom-respecting reasonable price > > reasonable performance computer platform for running Debian these > > Define your notion of "reasonable" for price and for performance. > > > Stefan "who finds a

Re: good freedom-respecting computer for running Debian

2023-03-20 Thread Stefan Monnier
> Is there any good low-hassle freedom-respecting reasonable price > reasonable performance computer platform for running Debian these Define your notion of "reasonable" for price and for performance. Stefan "who finds a Core2 Duo to offer reasonable performance"

Re: good freedom-respecting computer for running Debian

2023-03-20 Thread Lionel Élie Mamane
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 05:23:09PM -0600, Charles Curley wrote: >> It seems the only serious contenders, available new, with a future, >> would be Power and ARM? > Any thoughts on RISC-V? Not a released Debian architecture/port, which spells trouble for "just using it". Is it on good path to bec

Re: good freedom-respecting computer for running Debian

2023-03-20 Thread Charles Curley
On Tue, 21 Mar 2023 00:02:10 +0100 Lionel Élie Mamane wrote: > I also kinda hope for something rather quiet, too, > I've been developing increasing tinnitus and I already wear > noise-cancelling headphones when next to my desktop :-| Take a look at https://silentpc.com. > > It seems the only s