Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #223087 > unrolled thread

Zoom- best practice?

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  Zoom- best practice? Peter Ehlert <peter@sdi-baja.com> - 2020-06-05 18:50 +0200
    Re: Zoom- best practice? Paul Johnson <baloo@ursamundi.org> - 2020-06-05 18:50 +0200
      Re: Zoom- best practice? Peter Ehlert <peter@sdi-baja.com> - 2020-06-05 21:20 +0200
        Re: Zoom- best practice? Seeds Notoneofmy <notoneofmyseeds@gmx.de> - 2020-06-07 20:30 +0200
          Re: Zoom- best practice? Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2020-06-07 20:40 +0200
            Re: Zoom- best practice? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-06-07 21:00 +0200
              Re: Zoom- best practice? Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2020-06-07 21:00 +0200
                Re: Zoom- best practice? Seeds Notoneofmy <notoneofmyseeds@gmx.de> - 2020-06-07 21:20 +0200
                Re: Zoom- best practice? tomas@tuxteam.de - 2020-06-07 21:20 +0200
                  Re: Zoom- best practice? Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2020-06-07 22:10 +0200
                    Re: Zoom- best practice? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-06-07 22:30 +0200
                      Re: Zoom- best practice? Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2020-06-08 00:20 +0200
                        Re: Zoom- best practice? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-06-08 01:00 +0200
                Re: Zoom- best practice? Seeds Notoneofmy <notoneofmyseeds@gmx.de> - 2020-06-07 21:20 +0200
                  Re: Zoom- best practice? Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2020-06-07 21:30 +0200
                    Re: Zoom- best practice? Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2020-06-07 21:40 +0200
                      Re: Zoom- best practice? The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2020-06-07 21:50 +0200
            Re: Zoom- best practice? Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2020-06-07 21:00 +0200
              Re: Zoom- best practice? Peter Ehlert <peter@sdi-baja.com> - 2020-06-07 21:20 +0200
            Re: Zoom- best practice? Seeds Notoneofmy <notoneofmyseeds@gmx.de> - 2020-06-07 21:10 +0200
            Re: Zoom- best practice? The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2020-06-07 22:00 +0200
              Re: Zoom- best practice? Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2020-06-07 23:10 +0200
                Re: Zoom- best practice? Anastasios Lisgaras <tasosnumberten@yahoo.gr> - 2020-06-08 16:00 +0200
              Re: Zoom- best practice? The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2020-06-07 23:10 +0200
              Re: Zoom- best practice? "Russell L. Harris" <russell@rlharris.org> - 2020-06-07 23:10 +0200
                Re: Zoom- best practice? Tom Dial <tddial@comcast.net> - 2020-06-08 23:20 +0200
                  Re: Zoom- best practice? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-06-09 10:50 +0200
                    Re: Zoom- best practice? Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2020-06-09 11:50 +0200
                      Re: Zoom- best practice? rhkramer@gmail.com - 2020-06-09 17:10 +0200
                        Re: Zoom- best practice? Alberto Sentieri <22t@tripolho.com> - 2020-06-09 20:00 +0200
                          Re: Zoom- best practice? Peter Ehlert <peter@sdi-baja.com> - 2020-06-09 20:30 +0200
                    Re: Zoom- best practice? The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2020-06-09 12:50 +0200
                      Re: Zoom- best practice? Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2020-06-09 13:00 +0200
                        Re: Zoom- best practice? The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2020-06-09 13:10 +0200
                          Re: Zoom- best practice? Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2020-06-10 15:30 +0200
                            Reply semantics, yet again (was Re: Zoom- best practice?) The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2020-06-10 16:00 +0200
                              Re: Reply semantics, yet again (was Re: Zoom- best practice?) Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2020-06-11 17:20 +0200
                        Re: Zoom- best practice? Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2020-06-10 15:20 +0200
                          Re: Zoom- best practice? Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2020-06-10 15:20 +0200
                            Re: Zoom- best practice? Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2020-06-10 15:30 +0200
                            Re: Zoom- best practice? Paul Johnson <baloo@ursamundi.org> - 2020-06-10 16:00 +0200
                      Re: Zoom- best practice? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-06-09 14:00 +0200
            Re: Zoom- best practice? "Russell L. Harris" <russell@rlharris.org> - 2020-06-07 22:00 +0200
              Re: Zoom- best practice? Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2020-06-08 03:50 +0200
              Re: Zoom- best practice? David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-06-08 03:50 +0200
          Re: Zoom- best practice? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-06-07 20:40 +0200
          Re: Zoom- best practice? rhkramer@gmail.com - 2020-06-07 21:00 +0200
    Re: Zoom- best practice? Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2020-06-05 19:10 +0200
      Re: Zoom- best practice? Seeds Notoneofmy <notoneofmyseeds@gmx.de> - 2020-06-07 20:10 +0200
    Re: Zoom- best practice? "der.hans" <deb-user@LuftHans.com> - 2020-06-05 19:10 +0200
      Re: Zoom- best practice? Peter Ehlert <peter@sdi-baja.com> - 2020-06-05 21:40 +0200
    Re: Zoom- best practice? john doe <johndoe65534@mail.com> - 2020-06-05 19:40 +0200
      Re: Zoom- best practice? Keith bainbridge <keithrbau@gmail.com> - 2020-06-07 07:20 +0200
        Re: Zoom- best practice? Peter Ehlert <peter@sdi-baja.com> - 2020-06-07 16:10 +0200
          Re: Zoom- best practice? Admin4 <admin4@dwaves.de> - 2020-06-07 20:10 +0200
            Re: Zoom- best practice? Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> - 2020-06-07 20:30 +0200
    Re: Zoom- best practice? Charles Curley <charlescurley@charlescurley.com> - 2020-06-05 19:50 +0200
    Re: Zoom- best practice? Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2020-06-05 21:50 +0200
      Re: Zoom- best practice? Dominik George <nik@naturalnet.de> - 2020-06-05 23:10 +0200
      Re: Zoom- best practice? Tom Dial <tddial@comcast.net> - 2020-06-06 03:30 +0200
    Re: Zoom- best practice? Linux-Fan <Ma_Sys.ma@web.de> - 2020-06-06 00:20 +0200
      Re: Zoom- best practice? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-06-06 10:40 +0200
      Re: Zoom- best practice? Alex Mestiashvili <amestia@rsh2.donotuse.de> - 2020-06-06 13:20 +0200
        Re: Zoom- best practice? <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-06-06 17:50 +0200
          Re: Zoom- best practice? Paul Johnson <baloo@ursamundi.org> - 2020-06-06 18:00 +0200
    Re: Zoom- best practice? Ryan Nowakowski <tubaman@fattuba.com> - 2020-06-12 00:30 +0200

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

#223087 — Zoom- best practice?

Family is using Zoom, International.
They will use Zoom, and I need to participate.

I use Debian Mate Stable, and Firefox ESR

I am concerned about security, duh!
Looking for ideas.

my current thoughts, in order of preference:

1. Use a separate Debian alongside my daily driver, and use Only for the 
Zoom meetings

2. Sandbox? (but how can I do that?)

3. Use a different browser

4. What Me Worry? ... just update and flow with it

Thanks, Peter

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#223088

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 11:45 AM Peter Ehlert <peter@sdi-baja.com> wrote:

> Family is using Zoom, International.
> They will use Zoom, and I need to participate.
>
> I use Debian Mate Stable, and Firefox ESR
>
> I am concerned about security, duh!
> Looking for ideas.
>

Look into Big Blue Button and see if you can get your family to try that
instead.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#223096

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 6/5/20 9:47 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 11:45 AM Peter Ehlert <peter@sdi-baja.com 
> <mailto:peter@sdi-baja.com>> wrote:
>
>     Family is using Zoom, International.
>     They will use Zoom, and I need to participate.
>
>     I use Debian Mate Stable, and Firefox ESR
>
>     I am concerned about security, duh!
>     Looking for ideas.
>
>
> Look into Big Blue Button and see if you can get your family to try 
> that instead.

bigbluebutton is interesting. Thanks for the thought.

Many family members use Zoom, and like me, are past seven decades.
Several of the younger set use Zoom also.
I think I will not suggest change, I am the lone wolf.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#223177

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 6/5/20 8:57 PM, Peter Ehlert wrote:

>> Look into Big Blue Button and see if you can get your family to try
>> that instead.
>
> bigbluebutton is interesting. Thanks for the thought.
>
> Many family members use Zoom, and like me, are past seven decades.
> Several of the younger set use Zoom also.
> I think I will not suggest change, I am the lone wolf.
>
I just looked into this, having had an issue with Zoom recently. And it
seems it allows for installing the server locally? Am I understanding
this right, that one can have their own BBB server and provide access to
others to connect to and share/chat?

If that's the case, why would anyone need skype, zoom, etc? Only would
need to secure one's own BBB server properly. Can someone confirm, please?

https://github.com/bigbluebutton/bbb-install

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#223179

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

tomas@tuxteam.de (12020-06-07):
> Yes, the server is free software. As is Jitsi's. So you can get the
> source, build yourself or download pre-built thingies.

Do you have evidence of somebody other than the authors themselves
having managed to build it?

Regards,

-- 
  Nicolas George

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#223184

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 08:37:55PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote:
> tomas@tuxteam.de (12020-06-07):
> > Yes, the server is free software. As is Jitsi's. So you can get the
> > source, build yourself or download pre-built thingies.
> 
> Do you have evidence of somebody other than the authors themselves
> having managed to build it?

No. But I haven't tried, so...

Cheers
-- t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#223187

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

tomas@tuxteam.de (12020-06-07):
> No. But I haven't tried, so...

Well, me neither. But if I have not tried personally, I know people who
have tried and failed.

If only the authors can build a software, it cannot be considered Libre
Software, since part of the source code is missing. Open Source at best.

We have to acknowledge: there are no Libre Software solutions for
videoconferencing.

Regards,

-- 
  Nicolas George

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#223190

On 6/7/20 8:57 PM, Nicolas George wrote:
> We have to acknowledge: there are no Libre Software solutions for
> videoconferencing.

Well, that's about wrap this thread up. Thanks. And I'm glad I did not
proceed with the BBB promise. They've been around since 2007, but we
cannot say of them, an alternative to Zoom, skype, etc. So, what is it;
putting out stuff that only they could really use. Now! that's what I
call a project.

If I were a developer, here's my system for putting stuff online

develop my code

put it on github asking for contributors, not advertising it as a
solution for any problem(s), or for anyone to use

introduce it in forums like these, asking for testers

and when all that is done, build a website and then promise that this
will solve XYZ computing problem/need(s)

to dream up an idea, throw code together and advertise the claim to have
solved a problem when only you and your cat can use it is, well, 'false
advertising.' :)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#223191

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 08:57:54PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote:
> tomas@tuxteam.de (12020-06-07):
> > No. But I haven't tried, so...
> 
> Well, me neither. But if I have not tried personally, I know people who
> have tried and failed.
> 
> If only the authors can build a software, it cannot be considered Libre
> Software, since part of the source code is missing. Open Source at best.
> 
> We have to acknowledge: there are no Libre Software solutions for
> videoconferencing.

You may acknowledge what you want. I don't. As long as I don't try
to make my fingers dirty, I'll refrain from issuing any judgement.

You keep your belief. I stay agnostic, at this stage.

Cheers
-- t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#223206

On Sun 07 Jun 2020 at 21:19:08 +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 08:57:54PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote:
> > tomas@tuxteam.de (12020-06-07):
> > > No. But I haven't tried, so...
> > 
> > Well, me neither. But if I have not tried personally, I know people who
> > have tried and failed.
> > 
> > If only the authors can build a software, it cannot be considered Libre
> > Software, since part of the source code is missing. Open Source at best.
> > 
> > We have to acknowledge: there are no Libre Software solutions for
> > videoconferencing.
> 
> You may acknowledge what you want. I don't. As long as I don't try
> to make my fingers dirty, I'll refrain from issuing any judgement.
> 
> You keep your belief. I stay agnostic, at this stage.

Nicolas George states the obvious. All modern VoIP involves immense
resources to deliver to users. Resources cost money. Linux Central
is out of funds.

Videoconferencing on a mass scale is beyond the capabilities of what
is available in Debian.

-- 
Brian

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#223209

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 09:07:59PM +0100, Brian wrote:

[...]

> Nicolas George states the obvious. All modern VoIP involves immense
> resources to deliver to users.

A bit handwawy at that point: do you mean it's a complex programming
task or it needs network resources (bandwidth, low latency)?

> Resources cost money. Linux Central is out of funds.

Who is Linux Central?

> Videoconferencing on a mass scale is beyond the capabilities of what
> is available in Debian.

Debian is a distribution. Very little (relative to the whole packaged
content) is written explicitly for Debian/by Debian developers.

You don't really make sense, sorry.

Cheers
-- tomás

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#223217

On Sun 07 Jun 2020 at 22:24:56 +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 09:07:59PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > Nicolas George states the obvious. All modern VoIP involves immense
> > resources to deliver to users.
> 
> A bit handwawy at that point: do you mean it's a complex programming
> task or it needs network resources (bandwidth, low latency)?

Both, but mainly the latter. And lots of organisation and money.

> > Resources cost money. Linux Central is out of funds.
> 
> Who is Linux Central?

The entity that funds VoIP facilities like Zoom and WhatsApp. It doesn't
exist and never will. Therefore, there will never be any Libre Software
competitors to the commercial videoconferencing offerings.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#223221

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 11:17:39PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> On Sun 07 Jun 2020 at 22:24:56 +0200, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 09:07:59PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > Nicolas George states the obvious. All modern VoIP involves immense
> > > resources to deliver to users.
> > 
> > A bit handwawy at that point: do you mean it's a complex programming
> > task or it needs network resources (bandwidth, low latency)?
> 
> Both, but mainly the latter. And lots of organisation and money.

As for the latter: these folks [1] (sorry, in German), Freifunk München
tinker around with mesh networking to offer free WiFi in the city of
Munich (there are similar groups in other cities) and are experimenting
with a distributed Jitsi videobridge which reportedly has supported
up to 200 sessions. You can view current stats here [2].

Defetism is unsexy ;-)

Cheers

[1] https://ffmuc.net/
[2] https://stats.ffmuc.net/d/U6sKqPuZz/meet-stats?orgId=1&refresh=1m

-- t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#223193

On 6/7/20 8:57 PM, Nicolas George wrote:
> We have to acknowledge: there are no Libre Software solutions for
> videoconferencing.

Having said all that, the instructions to get BBB going seems solid.
Perhaps someone here with a bit of knowhow will do this and then put a
guide here? That would be very, very nice:

Here's my contribution:

https://docs.bigbluebutton.org/2.2/install.html

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#223197

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Seeds Notoneofmy (12020-06-07):
> Having said all that, the instructions to get BBB going seems solid.
> Perhaps someone here with a bit of knowhow will do this and then put a
> guide here? That would be very, very nice:
> 
> Here's my contribution:
> 
> https://docs.bigbluebutton.org/2.2/install.html

Installing from a binary repository: yes, that works. But that's not
Libre Software.

Regards,

-- 
  Nicolas George

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#223200

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Darac Marjal (12020-06-07):
> That's a rather ironic thing to say on a Debian mailing list :)

To the best of my knowledge, Debian is not the author of most packages,
and yet build them from source themselves: that proves the packages are
actually Libre Software. Again to the best of my knowledge, for most
packages, any user can rebuild them from source and it works, Debian
makes a lot of effort for that.

Can you say the same for these repositories?

Regards,

-- 
  Nicolas George

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#223202

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 2020-06-07 at 15:34, Nicolas George wrote:

> Darac Marjal (12020-06-07):
> 
>> That's a rather ironic thing to say on a Debian mailing list :)
> 
> To the best of my knowledge, Debian is not the author of most
> packages, and yet build them from source themselves: that proves the
> packages are actually Libre Software. Again to the best of my
> knowledge, for most packages, any user can rebuild them from source
> and it works, Debian makes a lot of effort for that.
> 
> Can you say the same for these repositories?

FWIW, in response to this thread I just went on an attempt to build
Jitsi myself. As far as I can tell at a skim of their Website and GitHub
pages, this seems to consist of two components, which are kept in
separate repositories and built / packaged separately: jitsi-meet /
jitsi-meet-web, the Web-interface UI for accessing the system, and
jitsi-videobridge, the actual videoconferencing backend (or something
like that).

I was able to successfully build a jitsi-videobridge Debian package from
current GitHub master, via dpkg-buildpackage, with only a little
difficulty and a few false starts.

I failed utterly in building a jitsi-meet(-web) Debian package from
current GitHub master by the same method; at least one file it relies
upon early in the build (css/all.css) is not included in the repository,
the tools it appears to expect to use to build that file do not appear
to be included or declared as build dependencies, and I don't see any
build documentation at all aside from debian/rules and the (generated?)
Makefile.

I could probably bang my head against this wall for a while longer and
get it working, but I don't care to install more things onto my machine
in stabs in the dark for something I don't actually currently plan to use.

So your point about this at least not being straightforward to build
seems proven, at least to a first-effort approximation.

-- 
   The Wanderer

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man.         -- George Bernard Shaw

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#223185

On Sun 07 Jun 2020 at 20:37:55 +0200, Nicolas George wrote:

> tomas@tuxteam.de (12020-06-07):
> > Yes, the server is free software. As is Jitsi's. So you can get the
> > source, build yourself or download pre-built thingies.
>
> Do you have evidence of somebody other than the authors themselves
> having managed to build it?

The OP says:

  > Family is using Zoom, International.
  > They will use Zoom, and I need to participate.

If he wishes to participate he uses Zoom. There isn't any interworking
between it and other similar programs. Discussion about Zoom can go on
endlessly. It doesn't alter the technical fact.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#223192

On 6/7/20 11:53 AM, Brian wrote:
> On Sun 07 Jun 2020 at 20:37:55 +0200, Nicolas George wrote:
>
>> tomas@tuxteam.de (12020-06-07):
>>> Yes, the server is free software. As is Jitsi's. So you can get the
>>> source, build yourself or download pre-built thingies.
>> Do you have evidence of somebody other than the authors themselves
>> having managed to build it?
> The OP says:
>
>    > Family is using Zoom, International.
>    > They will use Zoom, and I need to participate.
>
> If he wishes to participate he uses Zoom.
>
Correct.

The family has meetings with Zoom, I wish to attend... so I will use Zoom.

That is the bottom line.
sorry I was not super clear about that point at the onset.

I really do appreciate the suggestions for alternate solutions... I may 
use that info for
different groups.


> There isn't any interworking
> between it and other similar programs. Discussion about Zoom can go on
> endlessly. It doesn't alter the technical fact.
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#223188

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 6/7/20 8:37 PM, Nicolas George wrote:

> Do you have evidence of somebody other than the authors themselves
> having managed to build it?

This made me laugh, as I know where it's coming from; over promise,
under deliver. Of course, it works; in theory. But in practice, well,
that could take /you /the user, a lifetime.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web