Dezvous

Those phrases are true and they helped by making a patch, which Google will most likely end up merging. So what's your point? Should GrapheneOS blogs treat Google as if they're an individual with feelings having a bad day? The same Google that routinely and deliberately hampers the development of GrapheneOS and other similar projects?

Google pushed out bugged code ostensibly breaking millions of phones, mine included. They have the means to fix it in a short amount of time like GrapheneOS devs did, but they won't do it, so GrapheneOS took the initiative.

>Just zip it, be professional, focus on what you are doing and not on others.

How do you propose they "focus on what [they're] doing and not on others" when their entire project is dependent on other's (Google's) work that directly impacts their own users? There's nothing about this blog post that is unprofessional. GrapheneOS released a patch for a rather severe performance bug, which is outside the scope of their normal work, so they provided context into why they made the decision to do so.

I loathe Elon for probably the same reasons as yourself, but I can't deny Tesla's home battery systems are pretty well built.

Flock claims they perform greater than 20 billion plate reads per month and allegedly are used in solving a few thousand cases per year. Their actual usefulness in those solved cases is not quantified. A customer could have used the cameras for a search that returned nothing or produced no additional leads, but Flock could still say they were used in the investigation. So the ROI is not great.

Source: trust me bro

NextDNS https://nextdns.io/

A warrant required for the searches should already be the bare minimum. If the constitution were being upheld it would have been a requirement from day 1. So, I suppose I would be 'okay' with this in a sense. What really irks me is the fact that Flock, Axon, etc. are acting almost exclusively as a proxy for the government to conduct mass surveillance that would otherwise be unconstitutional. If the government were directly doing the indiscriminate tracking these companies are, it would be unconstitutional even before a traditional "search" (query) of the data took place, so instead they pay a proxy (i.e. Flock, Axon, etc.) to perform the tracking for them and offer the searches as a subscription service.

Oh yes, I'm aware of this. And Flock - in the past - listed other things they were already tracking outside of vehicles.

They aren't just tracking license plates though. They're tracking people - let me explain. Their 'ALPR' cameras (purposefully misleading to call them ALPR btw) capture the footage and send it off to their servers where it's retained - building a long-term historical location history on every vehicle. Advanced analysis is performed on the data to provide features to their customers such as the ability to search for vehicles based on a description of its characteristics (no plate needed), real-time route prediction, location heatmaps, and identifying vehicles that travel together (convoy search). Here's the important part - data is also ingested into another service they run called 'Nova', which is essentially a people search tool that connects the vehicles they capture directly to people and their PII. Access to their platforms (Flock OS, Nova, etc.) is sold via a subscription to law enforcement where they can perform searches for individuals or vehicle whereabouts for any reason, without a warrant, and practically no oversight or regulations.

Deflect all you want - nothing I said was incorrect or nonsensical. Flock only provides auditing tools because they're required to for compliance reasons. Then they use the tools as PR to essentially say 'look we're catching bad cops' which is not the case. As I said from the beginning - the responsibility for catching abusers is passed on to the customers and citizens doing FOIA requests. Flock is not 'exposing' the abuse at all, they're facilitating it and passing the moderation responsibilities down. Their CEO is a compulsive liar and sucks at PR.

Show me an example of Flock (i.e. a Flock employee or official company record) exposing a cop for abusing their systems. Providing auditing tools to the customers to discover abuse is not exposing the abuse. If they were exposing the abuse they would be publishing publicly when officers submitted searches that violated a search policy, which they could do with their 'transparency' portals. But they'll never do that.

Flock isn't even finding the abuse or exposing the abuse. Sometimes it's their customers (police) discovering the abuse - if they actually perform audits like they should, but usually it's citizens submitting FOIA requests for data and discovering the abuses.

Their omnibus docker image isn't bad at all in my experience

https://docs.gitlab.com/install/docker/installation/#install...

There's a difference between thinking those thoughts, and posting about them publicly to your following while simultaneously advocating for violence against trans individuals.

>"just because he thinks men shouldn't use women's bathrooms and spaces"

You're telling on yourself with this one, transphobe.

Lineham is an anti-trans activist. There's quite literally a whole section on his Wikipedia page dedicated to it, in fact it's the longest section on there. He's practically dedicated his life to the cause.

If they're really bothered by temporary noise that much, they should just invest in some ear plugs or noise cancelling headphones.

To each their own. Enjoy your boring life.

Have you considered people can enjoy different things than you? I personally enjoy a nice exhaust tone and I like subwoofers as well. And I don't like them just because they might piss off somebody like yourself, it's for my own enjoyment. Not all exhausts and subwoofers are created equal. Most modern cars with 'premium' sound systems like Bose, JBL, etc. have subwoofers, but they're usually small and don't require a lot of power. The system they installed in this car might have been the OEM premium sound package as well - the one Toyota offers is JBL and comes with a subwoofer. Do you get mad when it's OEM or just DIY? The GR Corolla has a 'loud' exhaust from the factory as well. Loud enough that you'd probably rage at it judging by this comment.

People buy aftermarket exhausts for a variety of reasons. They can produce a different tone, cut down on exhaust 'drone' (which the GR Corolla is notorious for with it's factory exhaust), offer alternative styling, provide weight savings, and reduce backpressure/improve flow. It's not just about volume. Certainly you could be an asshole who buys an exhaust just because it's loud, but that's not why the majority are doing it, it's for their own enjoyment and usually provides a performance improvement. If they really wanted to achieve max volume they could just do an open dump exhaust or a hood exit, it would be cheaper than buying a Borla and significantly louder.

Imagine the shock of the non-car-enthusiasts in this thread when they discover the factory exhaust on this car is already pretty loud. It's so loud from the factory it comes with a valved exhaust to tone it down under light throttle and idle.

Elon publicly states a lot of things, most of which aren't truthful.

Surely he means that himself and his billionaire buddies will be the first boots on the ground when we decide to plunder another country for oil again. No?

It's going up and not even close to the tipping point of going down

I'm also on firefox 149 with ublock origin. Probably just need to enable some more filters.

It's quite ironic to get an amazon ring video ad while viewing this article.

They can, yes. But this is a legal loophole that the government abuses to circumvent a warrant required by the 4th amendment.

Requesting or buying, the end result is the same; the government is obtaining historical location information on private citizens. Arguably, buying it is worse too. At least with a warrant there is ostensibly probable cause to support a search. Circumventing a warrant and buying in bulk means they're searching data of citizens not even suspected of crimes. And you're probably right that the courts (government) are not going to prevent the FBI (a government agency) from doing their job. That doesn't mean I'm wrong in my assessment. It means that you base your idea of correctness on an obviously flawed legal system.

Consenting to data being collected by a company does not mean you consent to a search by the government of said data.

> This is very different from buying your data from a company especially when the user consented to their location being tracked.

No, it's not 'very different'. When you sign a cellular contract you consent to all sorts of tracking and data collection, but it still requires a warrant for government to obtain.