I fully understand, that if terms of service of an anonymous, free service are violated, rules must change and anonymous usage cannot be permitted anymore.
However, if the new authentication scheme requires an account at either Google or Facebook or Microsoft, with no other option, that leaves a bad taste in the mouth.
It is not a practical problem, because there are hundreds of alternatives available, but IMHO it sends the wrong signal.
https://jitsi.org/blog/authentication-on-meet-jit-si/
Authentication on meet.jit.si
What’s going on? Starting on August 24th, we will no longer support the anonymous creation of rooms on meet.jit.si, and will require the use of an account (we will be supporting Google, GitHub and Facebook […]Emil Ivov (Jitsi)
Debacle
in reply to Debacle • • •Debacle
in reply to Debacle • • •Speaking of the wonderful #JitsiMeet: I'm still running it on a #Debian 11 #bullseye container. Is it safe to upgrade to Debian 12 #bookworm using the "stable" #deb packages from #Jitsi #apt repository? TIA!
#Question #Help
Neil Brown
in reply to Debacle • • •Debacle
in reply to Neil Brown • • •Yes, that helps, thank you! If it works for you, it should work for me 🙂
Could you send me your sources.list line, just to be sure, we are doing the same thing? TIA!