This is already done in other areas. In many places each bank offering has a single digit risk score. It’s based on your exposure and how volatile the instruments it’s investing in are. Savings account will be 1, stock market closer to 10. You’re signing really complex contract with the bank but the risk can be objectively verified. Same could be done for ToS.
Privacy and cars are mutually exclusive. If you want privacy use public transport and pay in cash. With cars you have licence plate scanner, cameras and tollbooths everywhere (no to mention that most people drive with their phones on them). “They” will know where were you driving no matter what car you use. The question really is what data are you trying to hide and from who? The obvious thing to do is not to give your data to advertisers. Selling you shit is the whole point of most of the data collection. Just get extra phone and use some fake google account for android auto and you should be fine here. As for car companies all they will gather is some generic data about your driving habits but guess what? Everyone knows this already because driving is not private (again, if you want to hide this use public transport). So yeah, it would be nice for car companies to be more transparent about the data they gather and how they use it but it’s really not a big issue. If you’re paranoid about it then don’t drive. If you’re driving the data your car is leaking though analytics is not your biggest problem.
There were multiple reports about sleazy companies reaching out to developers of popular apps and Chrome addons and offering them money for their accounts. The money is really good but there’s still a lot of devs that can say ‘no’. They will just use to track some people, it’s not a completely new business that will grow and earn them money like Instagram or something.
If state actor would create it it would be a backdoor. Exploits are by definition bugs/security issues that can be… well, exploited and state-level actors are really good at finding them. Still, if it takes resources of state actor to find an exploit I don’t think it’s a massive L. Yes, it’s totally possible they had some other serious security issues recently and I haven’t been paying attention. That’s why I’m asking.
Finding an exploit created by state-level actor is not a massive L. They have shown in the past that they are able to hack air gaped systems, weaken commonly used security standards and implant vulnerabilities into commercial software. I don’t think you will find a company that is immune to this. Other than that, did they really have so many security issues recently?
Are you sure? Last time I’ve checked adding Network Extension entitlement required joining apple developer program which costs $99 per year. It doesn’t say this explicitly in any of the docs but it does say you need a certificate and to get a certificate you have to join Apple Developer Program. So you have to pay $99 to install an app you’re developing on your own phone.
And how will you share an app with other people without signing it? I have no idea. Looking at the link you shared the free membership doesn’t include any form of app distribution. I think to install any app on iOS it has to be signed and to get a certificate you need to paid membership. Without paying the only thing you can do is to run some apps on your own phone. And from what you saying even this is difficult because you have to sing it every week.
Cool but this is still just installation, right? The app will still have to be signed by apple? I will still have to pay Apple to build and sign the app? That’s the difference between android and iOS. On android you pay to put the app on play store. On iOS you pay to sign the app even if you’re developing locally. And yes, not all apps require signing but some do. You have to pay apple just to build the app and put it on your own phone.
Sure, it’s also just my intuition but trying to lose weight myself and watching friends try to lose weight and 15 minutes of light activity per day does nothing to your energy balance. To actually use weight I have to cycle hours spending like 2000kcal couple times a week. The 100kcal is 5% of your average daily intake. If you’re very active it will even less. Depending on your diet you can excrete more calories then that. Your body will just compensate by adjusting metabolism and you will not have to eat more not to lose weight. With electric bike it’s definitely possible to get in the range when you will have to adjust your diet but I don’t think it’s the case with brooming. Average person will be able to swipe couple days a week without actually eating more, that’s why I think it’s ‘free’. But maybe we have to do some experiments. Do you have a broom?
I think you hugely overestimate the amount of energy used for brooming. It’s not like it’s a crossfit workout. I don’t eat more on the days I clean. My diet with and without a broom will stay the same so brooming is basically free when it comes to energy. People don’t use vacuums because they save money on food this way. They use them for their convenience. Vacuums let you save time, not energy. So yes, if you spend the time you save planting trees it’s great but we’re getting pretty far away from the broom vs. vacuum discussion and we’re starting to talk about imaginary people and their imaginary lives.
I think that if we’re talking about human slave responsible only for swiping the floors that I feed vegetables and keep alive solely for the purpose of operating the broom you can be right.
If we’re taking about the amount of calories I use while swiping and compare it with a robot that someone had to manufacture, transport and than charge using electricity it will be a clear win for the broom. Maybe if the robot lasted 50 years and I controlled my diet to the point that I was able to eat 3% of a carrot daily less because I’m not swiping any more the robot could win but it’s an absurd scenario.
Simple, we just have to force google to allow manufacturers to offer degoogled android on their phones which is what EU is doing: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/18/eu-fine-google-android-anti-competitive-behaviour-consumers
“Google is also ordered to stop blocking manufacturers from using so-called forked or modified versions of Android, such as Amazon’s Fire OS, if they want to use Google services on their other devices.”
Next they have to force google to allow alternative app stores preinstalled on devices and give them the same permissions play store has. With this you will be able to see truly open android actually available in stores. Companies like Mozilla (more probably some consortium like Mozilla/duckduckgo/Sony/LG/whatever) will be able to establish alternative app store that will actually compete with play store and offer same apps. We where close to this years ago buy google offered discounts to phone manufacturers that did not include other stores, made the system depend on their services and then punished companies that tried to compete by locking them out of those services. If EU manages to revert it and open up the platform we will have viable alternative that’s way better than the web. And it can happen real soon. That’s our best option at the moment.
As I explained in other post, AOSP may be open sourced but it still depends on android services owned by google. I have degoogled android and some apps don’t work and other apps require device registration. And of course most apps are still only in play store. We’re not that far for properly open platform and hopefully EU will get as there but we’re not there just yet.
Web is a shitty platform. Since it started gaining in popularity as the way to do apps and not just deliver HTML it has been constant nightmare when it comes to privacy and security. It still is. On top of that your putting another sandbox on top of everything which doesn’t make much sense on mobile and is bad for performance. It makes sense for some multi platform apps but web apps can’t even access the file system in a normal way. Giving browsers a way to do this will be another security nightmare. Same with Bluetooth. Basically with web you have two choices: keep it all sandboxed limiting functionality while struggling with performance the way electron does or open it app and let random scripts execute with full access to your user space. Neither is a good option for a platform. You can reuse tools like js, CSS and HTML in some new platform but web will not make it’s way to desktops and mobiles.
So aurora is OS but it’s pulling apps from play store. Each time you update your apps the updates will come from google. Unless you will manually download apk files from the web… It works for now but aurora already had issues accessing play store and it may stop working one day.
I have an app for public EV chargers that requires google device registration to work. It’s the best network around so sometimes I have to use it. I have device registration disabled normally but that’s another example where google services are needed for crucial functionality.
And I’ve recently installed another app that would not let me authenticate on LOS. Google is doing this on purpose and more and more apps will not work on custom ROMs.
And we are really far away from creating mobile app ecosystem that’s not relaying on google. You can install mobian or something but currently absolutely no one supports it. I need android to use my bike GPS, my car charger, connect to my car, access my bank and even to use my climbing wall. None of this has native mobile Linux client. It will take decades before companies start supporting Linux on mobile the way they support it on desktop.
On a Operating system/free software level we’re doing fine. Not great (still no true open source phone OS, Firefox has like 3% market share, lots of closed/unfixable hardware) but you can work and have fun using OSS and it’s not going anywhere. On a global economy level we’re as fucked as always. Big tech isn’t going anywhere and 99% of people will choose convenience over ethics every single time. We’re a minority here and always will be.
There’s a lot of drama about it so I finally took a closer look and yeah, it’s not as bad as everyone tries to make it.
“The only way to comply with the law, experts say, would be to put so-called client-side scanning software on users’ devices to examine messages before they’re sent, which would make the encryption largely useless.”
Locally scanning before sending would not make encryption useless. Does spellchecking a message make encryption useless? What this is all about is hashing a picture someone is about to send and checking in a DB of known CP material. If it’s a match you report it. It does not invalidate encryption, it doesn’t send anything from the device unencrypted.
If there’s anything else in this law that could be problematic please tell. The articles I saw don’t say anything else so for me it looks like a non issue.
Privacy data != “can be used for ads”. Privacy is about personal info, info that can be used to identify you personally. So yes, none of this data is personal but not because of ads but because none of it is tied to an individual. Only IP is problematic here but the rest of data is not very sensitive anyway.
People converse where people are. That is trivial.
Again, you’re confused. Ironic doesn’t mean it’s illogical or wrong. But that’s ok, irony is a difficult concept to understand and has been misunderstood by many people before you (like Alanis Morissette, isn’t that ironic?). But hey, let’s ask AI:
Would you consider posting videos about privacy on youtube which is run by google ironic?
The question of whether it’s ironic to post videos about privacy on YouTube, which is owned by Google, is a matter of perspective. On one hand, YouTube, like many other online platforms, is operated by a company that collects user data for various purposes, including targeted advertising. This can be seen as a potential conflict of interest when discussing online privacy.
On the other hand, many content creators on YouTube use the platform to educate and raise awareness about privacy issues. They may provide tips on how to protect your privacy online, inform users about potential risks, and advocate for better data protection practices. So, while the platform is owned by Google, it still serves as a valuable medium for spreading information about online privacy.
In this sense, it might not be considered ironic, but rather a practical choice for reaching a broad audience with privacy-related content. Users can take steps to protect their privacy while using platforms like YouTube, such as adjusting privacy settings, using VPNs, and being mindful of the information they share. It’s all part of the ongoing discussion about balancing the benefits of online services with concerns about privacy and data security.
Interesting… so I ask:
so something practical can not be ironic?
Practicality and irony are not mutually exclusive concepts. Something can be both practical and ironic depending on the context and the way it is interpreted. Irony often arises when there is a contrast between what is expected and what actually occurs.
In the case of posting privacy-related content on YouTube, the potential irony lies in the contrast between the platform’s ownership by Google, a company that collects user data for advertising purposes, and the content’s focus on privacy protection. Some people might find this situation ironic because a company with a vested interest in collecting data is hosting content that encourages users to protect their data.
However, others may not see it as ironic but rather as a practical way to reach a large audience to discuss and educate about privacy issues. The intention may be to use the platform’s reach and influence to promote better privacy practices.
In summary, while practicality and irony can coexist, whether or not something is considered ironic depends on individual perspectives and interpretations of the situation.
Yeah, pretty much my take. It’s both practical and ironic. You watch those videos so you focus on the practicality. I don’t watch them so while I don’t negate it’s practical I focus on the irony of it.
Yep, I started seeing the new silly puzzle based capcha and even after solving it the page often says ‘you’ve been blocked, fuck off’.