Get a BeagleBoard! https://www.beagleboard.org/boards/beaglev-ahead

Edit: or a Star64! https://pine64.com/product-category/star64/

Do you perhaps have Resist Fingerprinting or Strict Enhanced Tracking Protection turned on?

I was never able to get videoconferencing sites working with any combination of those (on Linux), so I just use a vanilla Chrome instance just for videoconferencing.

Yes a back up is possible. Don’t back up partitions, back up the whole device. All 150+g at once.

Whenever you try to mount the device or the filesystems, make sure to mount it read-only so that no changes are written to the device.

Also, shrinking 84g of data into 32g is definitely not possible. Just changing the fdisk partition table doesn’t shrink or relocate the data. You need a filesystem-aware resizing tool to shrink the filesystem before shrinking the partition.

Hopefully you can just change the partition table back to the original values and get a clean fsck.

I think the glass doors on the refrigerated coolers that were electronic displays that showed you an ideal image of the drink or whatever was supposed to be inside, but you couldn’t see through them to see if there were any actually on the shelf.

Well, time to go watch Black Mirror again. You know, the one with the robot dog that hunts you, or the one with the quadcopters that kamikaze tap you on the head with explosives?

https://mbasic.facebook.com/ still works. It’s missing some modern niceties, but usable. That’s what I use for occasional messages.

It probably won’t affect Fedora because that’s already a consumer-oriented distro. For me, it’s a philosophical question. Do you want to run a distro that is supported by a company who would behave that way?

What did you find in Fedora that you didn’t find in the other distros? Was it something about the graphical interface, or was it more about the system packaging ecosystem and developers?

In other words, if the sha matches, then it wasn’t corrupted during downloading. If the signature matches, then it wasn’t tampered with before you downloaded it.

There’s also a third check. Even if the certificate signature is valid, you have to have confidence that the certificate is authentic and trusted to be from the original author. This is usually done by having a trusted third party sign the certificate with another, more trusted, certificate.

If you get the sha256 from the same place you got the main file, then anyone tampering with the main file could also recalculate the sha256 to match the tampered file. A signature signed with a certificate uses complex math (public-key asymmetric cryptography) to give some certainty that the signed content (the sha256) is the same sha256 that the original file author created. It’s not mathematically feasible to recalculate the certificate signature. Why don’t we just sign the whole original file with the public-key crypto and skip the sha256? Because asymmetric crypto is much, much slower than plain symmetric crypto or hash functions. It’s faster and easier to generate the valid hash or key, then sign or encrypt just the smaller key.