SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 17 submissions in the queue.
SoylentNews
posted by
janrinok
on Sunday February 05 2017, @07:31PM
from the diminished-user-base-on-old-boxes dept.
from the diminished-user-base-on-old-boxes dept.
The privacy-centric TAILS Linux distro (The Amnesic Incognito Live System) announces:
Tails 3.0 will require a 64-bit x86-64 compatible processor. As opposed to older versions of Tails, it will not work on 32-bit processors.
We have waited for years until we felt it was the right time to do this switch. Still, this was a hard decision for us to make.
[...] Our current goal is to release Tails 3.0, and stop supporting computers with a 32-bit processor, on June 13, 2017.
Announced February 1: Tails 2.10 is out.
The site's news page (which could REALLY use #FragmentIdentifiers MUCH more effectively) says:
Tails 2.11 is scheduled for March 3rd.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
TAILS 3.0 Will Require a 64-Bit Processor
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 23 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
The last time I saw him he was walking down Lover's Lane holding his own hand.
-- Fred Allen
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 05 2017, @10:30PM
Of course, this does nothing for the huge swathes of the world's population who have older machines and no access to upgrades.
Considering how many of these people are EXACTLY the target audience for T(A)ILS, this really is a head scratcher of a change at this point. I know people who still use 32 bit computers as their primary computers here in the United States. They're not big modern gamers, and generally just browse the web and perform basic office functions along with text based protocols (irc, email, etc). For the use case for many people, they're perfectly fine, functional computers. The idea that someone in most oppressive regimes (particularly one who is working against the power structure) can necessarily afford to upgrade a computer that otherwise still works fine seems a bit poorly thought through. And while perhaps other distros with different aims could say "so just use the older version and maybe take some extra firewall measures", that idea would just be plain silly with T(A)ILS, as out of date privacy software may as well be no software at all, in many cases.
Eventually being 64 bit only is a sensible move, but I really must say I think it's too early.
Perhaps a decent alternative (or supplement) to going this route would be to roll out a build-your-own-iso script/tool to support varying architectures. Especially with Apple now looking at making more use of ARM chips, we may have to admit that the days of an architectural monoculture are behind us.
(Score: 1) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Monday February 06 2017, @03:26AM
Maybe their chosen web-browsers are dropping 32-bit support.