• 0 Posts
  • 262 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 15th, 2023

help-circle

  • Do I trust them? Sure, I guess, when it comes to privacy from other entities.

    Do I trust that I will have privacy from Apple? Hell no. What does “local” even mean on an iCloud connected iOS device anymore? Because there’s nothing on that phone Apple can’t access remotely if they want to, and if any of the AI cache is backed up on iCloud, that’s not local anymore.

    Do I trust them with the data they’re absolutely gathering? No, but I don’t trust anyone with it. But I also think that data would be relatively safer with Apple than their competitors.

    If Apple announced Recall? Apple wouldn’t announce Recall, that’s the whole point. Apple wouldn’t be so brazen and stupid to push a tool that is so obviously invasive and so poorly implemented. Apple earned its trust by not making those mistakes.

    But if they did decide to say fuck it and implement something like Recall, of course people would trust them. That’s what trust means: consumers take them at their word. But if it’s as bad as Microsoft’s Recall, Apple would burn all that trust when people found out.

    People don’t believe Microsoft because they have long since burned any trust and good will for most of their consumers. They have proven time and time again they don’t give a shit about users’ wants or needs, and users have felt that. So when they announce Recall, they have no earned trust. No one believes their assurances. There’s no good faith to cushion this. And it turns out everyone was right not to grant them that trust.

    Does that mean I’d ever use an Apple device? Hell no. I value my privacy, but I value it on my terms, not Apple’s, and I will never use a device that creates privacy through taking power from the user.


  • deweydecibel@lemmy.worldtoProgrammer Humor@lemmy.mlAI layoffs
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Maybe the central problem is racing to put other people out of work period, regardless of who they are. Maybe putting people out of work is not a net benefit for society, it’s actually negative in the long run, and only truly a benefit for shareholders. They don’t need any more of those at the expense of the working class.





  • The value is likely that they’re selling it. Because they’re a non-profit, and they have to make money somehow. Or they’re using it to develop some kind of ai search function.

    But the important, critical fact here is that Mozilla has routinely demonstrated that they can be trusted when they tell you “You can turn this off, and if you turn this off, it is actually off, and it will stay off.”

    You will never see that from Google or Microsoft or any of the others.

    Look at the part where they mentioned that if you already disabled telemetry, this new telemetry is also disabled. Think about how rare that is nowadays with any consumer software from most big for-profit tech companies. New bullshit is always on by default, even if you disabled it previously. The fact Mozilla respected that puts them miles ahead of any of their competitors.

    As for the “path they’re going on”, I don’t know what to tell you, man. Every company is on this same path right now. The economics of the internet and the tech industry have gone to absolute shit, where privacy, user choice, competitive markets, and non-profits are all dying a slow painful death to enrich wall street. Mozilla will probably get caught in it too, but the best we can hope for is they hold out the longest.





  • At any point in the process, does it warn you about setting up recovery with personal email addresses?

    Feels like with as much as Proton advertises nowadays as a privacy protecting service, they need to be taking into consideration that a lot of their customers now are going to be average users who don’t know anything about proper OpSec. They should be much clearer about what things they can’t protect you from.

    It shouldn’t be in a press release like this, they should be explaining the difference between privacy and anonymity to the customer. It’s not like their marketing team isn’t aware of the fact most people don’t know any better.

    It’s in their best interests, too, because it doesn’t matter how many times you say “we provide privacy not anonymity”, the headlines are a bad look.




  • Should probably also be acknowledged that the sample size is not going to be the same.

    You’re going to get a bunch of people piling in to highly rate the early episodes that they remember watching when they were kids, but a significantly lower number are going to be voting on the episodes that came later.

    Really the whole premise of trying to compare and contrast the seasons for such a long running show that existed before IMDb even started is flawed on many levels.



  • deweydecibel@lemmy.worldtoData Is Beautiful@lemmy.mlThe decline of the Simpsons 📉
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    77
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Thank you for actually acknowledging this.

    The way the Internet talks about the Simpsons is so damn annoying. The vast, vast majority of them haven’t actually watched an episode and formed their own opinion on it in over a decade, they just keep repeating the same tired meme over and over again.

    Long running shows have different writers coming and going, therefore quality fluctuates up and down over time. That’s one of the nice things about a long running show: it gets to experiment and let new blood invigorate new life into it. There is no singular “death”, there’s just hills and valleys.




  • Both Lee and Lyman retweeted a post from Libs of TikTok, which the Washington Post says has amassed an audience of millions on X, largely by targeting LGBTQ+ people. In the video, a group of students speaking over each other complain that some students at the school wear masks and pounce on people.

    This is kind of tacked on at the end. Looks like nothing actually happened or was reported to have happened, but one video of some kid saying it was happening in the middle of an argument got shared by a hate group on TikTok.

    Matter of fact, the story seems to indicate the kids wearing animal ear headbands got food thrown at them, but didn’t actually do anything except take them off when asked. So we have a student bullying another student and the bullied student is somehow the thing that got inflated into being a problem.