this post was submitted on 08 Mar 2025
72 points (89.1% liked)
Open Source
36205 readers
424 users here now
All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!
Useful Links
- Open Source Initiative
- Free Software Foundation
- Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Software Freedom Conservancy
- It's FOSS
- Android FOSS Apps Megathread
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to the open source ideology
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
- !libre_culture@lemmy.ml
- !libre_software@lemmy.ml
- !libre_hardware@lemmy.ml
- !linux@lemmy.ml
- !technology@lemmy.ml
Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
In case anyone had the same kneejerk reaction: no, this is not about privacy etc. Just performance, according to OOP.
Still, this reads like a reaction to a recent overblown debacle.
edit: no, it actually does say "hardened security" in the README, lol, but the whole project seems to boil down to some compiler flags.
Honestly, OOP should've broadcast that fact. It is a lot easier sell than letting people think they changed the code somehow.
Not sure why they are trying to show it as a seperate project.
*not overblown