Fire up Wireshark on a different machine and transfer a file between two other machines, you won’t see anything.

This is true, but only because we’ve replaced Ethernet hubs with switches.

An Ethernet hub was a dumber, cheaper device that imitated a switch, but with a fundamental difference: all connected devices were in the same collision domain.

I don’t know too much about WiFi but it probably does the same, it’s just a bridge to the same network.

Wireless communication has the same problem as Ethernet hubs, with no real solution like a switch though. Any wireless transmission involves an antenna, and transmitting is similar to standing in your yard with a bull horn to talk to your buddy two houses down. Anyone with an antenna can receive the wireless signal you send out. Period.

So some really smart people found ways to keep the stuff you send private, but anyone can sit nearby and capture data going through the air, it’s just not anything you can use because of the encryption.

It’s easy to post on a forum and say so.

Maybe you even are actually asking AI questions and researching whether or not it’s accurate.

Perhaps you really are the world’s most perfect person.

But even if that’s true, which I very seriously doubt, then you’re going to be the extreme minority. People will ask AI a question, and if they like the answers given, they’ll look no further. If they don’t like the answers given, they’ll ask the AI with different wording until they get the answer they want.

It’s a single data data point, nothing more, nothing less. But that single data point is evidence of using LLMs in their code generation.

Time will tell if this is a molehill or a mountain. When it comes to data privacy, given that it just takes one mistake and my data can be compromised, I’m going to be picky about who I park my data with.

I’m not necessarily immediately looking to jump ship, but I consider it a red flag that they’re using developer tools centered around using AI to generate code.

There it is. The bold-faced lie.

“I don’t blindly trust AI, I just ask it to summarize something, read the output, then read the source article too. Just to be sure the AI summarized it properly.”

Nobody is doing double the work. If you ask AI a question, it only gets a vibe check at best.

If you want to trade accuracy for speed, that’s your prerogative.

AI has its uses. Transcribing subtitles, searching images by description, things like that. But too many times, I’ve seen AI summaries that, if you read the article the AI cited, it can be flatly wrong on things.

What’s the point of a summary that doesn’t actually summarize the facts accurately?

Sure, but with all the mistakes I see LLMs making in places where professionals should be quality checking their work (lawyers, judges, internal company email summaries, etc) it gives me pause considering this is a privacy and security focused company.

It’s one thing for AI to hallucinate cases, and another entirely to forget there’s a difference between = and == when the AI bulk generates code. One slip up and my security and privacy could be compromised.

You’re welcome to buy in to the AI hype. I remember the dot com bubble.

There’s been evidence in their github repo that they’re using LLMs to code their tools now.

It’s making me reconsider using them.

What I want is a way to answer the phone like a fax machine. Just press a button and the call gets answered and immediately starts playing that fax machine sound.

I’ll bet that would stop calls. Surely they have something that can tell if they’re calling a fax machine over and over.

But that’s how dogwhistles work: they can hide behind a veil of plausible deniability.

And his refusal in the leadup to the 2020 election to denounce the Proud Boys.

“Stand Back and Stand By” isn’t the kind of thing you say to a group you want nothing at all to do with.

As someone who took the plunge years ago, you just have to accept that some programs will just be unusable. There are likely alternatives, though very few will be ‘drop in’ replacements so to speak. So there will be a learning curve.

It’s the price you pay to have full control of your system. As time goes on, it gets easier.

On one hand, I get it. You’re used to Windows and want to use an environment you’re used to and apps you’re comfortable with.

On the other, you need to be aware that you’re going to be constantly fighting an uphill battle. Microsoft doesn’t care that you don’t want those programs using resources, they’re going to install them because it’s in the best interest of their shareholders. The programs might be able to be removed using third party tools, but then you’re relying on random tools found on the internet to remove bits of your operating system without hurting anything or doing anything malicious.

The data these programs gather is more valuable to Microsoft than the blowback because this is the exact stance people will take: sure it sucks that this is being forced upon me, but it’s still better than leaving. So I’ll either deal with it (99% if users are here) or ill find a random program and cross my fingers it does only what’s on the label.

The only solution I see is to swap to something else, causing Microsoft to lose market share and thereby convincing shareholders not to force this on users.

The choice is yours.

I don’t think anyone is advocating for turning a blind eye to Mozilla. I think the argument being made is that a monoculture for browsers is a concern that can outweigh some blunders Mozilla makes.

I’m old enough to remember what a shit show ActiveX was for web security.

I can’t help but see it as the foot in the door.

I understand that Mozilla needs money, but I can’t make everyone who uses Firefox commit to donating money to keep them from having to do things like this to stay afloat. But them going down this path makes me not want to donate at all.

I never said I was, just that I wanted to support the browser that respects my privacy, and this move is making me reconsider it.

As long as it’s open source someone will be able to find a way to turn it off, either by an addon or by patching and compiling the source code.

IMO, that’s splitting a hair.

For a browser that supposedly respects user privacy, the fact that this is opt-out rather than opt-in really leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

I’m going to reconsider my monthly recurring donation to Mozilla, especially if they keep this up.