1,893 karma · joined March 29, 2015
It does nothing to dissuade content gatekeepers from employing restrictive DRM on their sites.
Anti-DRM would be avoiding anything that gives money to those that employ DRM to incentivize the removal of the DRM. Frankly, flat out piracy (streaming ripped content) is more likely to result in the removal of DRM than making it appear that the DRM is working well for the provider.
On two, it seems like they are concerned with trademark to me. A workaround could be making a website that parses and displays Twitter content and call it something else. Then, in an app, make no mention of Twitter and only the website.
I like Pixelfed, but it was naive to rip the filter names and think that was somehow ok. It was also a totally unnecessary thing to copy. An imitation filter could be called anything and people will be able to tell (assuming you did a good enough job imitating).
There is no strict technical definition of “on” in this case.
Also, more dense housing actually usually means less commuting. That’s one of the reasons I generally support it. People living closer to work means less commute time resulting in less carbon as well.
Kind of like how domestic espionage is justified with calls of “think of the children”. They try to make you seem heartless to oppose their position.
What someone other than these media groups may do is make a “bold claim” that may be true but not demonstrably so. Something like that may shy a big company away from casting the first stone and instead to report on someone else’s claim as an allegation.
Additionally, it’s a benefit that users can now install any apps that Apple refuses to allow.
I use a password manager, but my Yubikey has all my 2FA. Including TOTP.
They don’t do this anymore. I recently bought a hard drive and found the anti static bag was opened. When I returned it Amazon made it clear I would not get a refund until it was back at the warehouse. I dropped it at a Whole Foods return desk and got my refund days later.
Most people think of “private” as between the conversation parties, not everyone in the conversation, the company, and any government with leverage on them.
Encryption at rest prevents from some intrusion attacks but does absolutely nothing against a warrant if the government has leverage.
That a government will scan all domestic phone numbers against a Signal API to identify a list of users who, at one time, installed Signal and use that list to target you? They can do the same with IP addresses of people using VPNs as well. Something is tied to you regardless.
You’re right that the Signal would allow this by phone number or IP, so it’s an additional angle at the same threat.
They can still beat you with a wrench to divulge your information even if it’s on Matrix or even pen and paper.