freebuju

There is no legitimate reason for Facebook, or any other social media website, to require a copy of your ID other than for purposes of renting your authentic profile to advertisers.

> The narrative that change happens through the mass public getting angry, forcing politicians to respond, is overblown at best.

It used to work. As recent as a couple decades ago at least. The Arab spring that swept Middle East and parts of North Africa in 2010s comes to mind.

Protesting and going to the streets, depending on where you are in this world, feels more like a dying art today rather than the stuff of revolution we've associated them with in the past. Feels wrong just typing that.

Maybe we've just become insensitive to it all and do not have the will to fight governments.

Maybe our collective thoughts and ideas are more homogenous than ever before.

I think the bigger point is the lack of trust in our public health rather than laying out the facts. The same way any person who is pro-vax will argue how beneficial it is, is the same way a person who doesn't believe it is beneficial to them will argue it out.

There is no one clear science, one clear truth to rule them all in this pandemic. This is the only truth I have come to terms with.

I see anti-vaxxers with their straw man arguments as just people who have no trust in the government and the health authorities. Can't blame them though, since the pandemic started almost 2 years ago, there is still a lot we don't know about it's actual origins.

Maybe the title should read: The average media consumer becomes more news literate.

In the advent of social media being a megaphone and a news source nowadays, media organizations ceased to own the monopoly of news.

It doesn't help matters that old media is busy cannibalizing the very thing that built its brand: quality journalism.

Very common to see media organizations these days report government speech as facts. Investigative journalism is nothing but an old fable now.

Maybe true, but I at least know in advance that these devices may be collecting data on me. I'd argue that this is mostly opt-in on my end since am fully aware of the data collection and have a rough idea of the extent this is done. Average Joe down the road doesn't give any care and still actively uses his Facebook account stands no chance against the spying. He can't see it coming.

Personally, I live a simple "non-connected" life as much as I possibly can. Any service providers I choose to entertain have to do with the minimum required information to hold the account.

Technically, spying on someone involves the element of the subject not knowing that they are being watched.

In this case, if you haven't been following this CSAM scandal and making use of iCloud as usual, should Apple turn this enigma machine on, you don't know your device is being used to spy on you.

Am sure Apple will employ the best brains to craft some form of legalese to make sure you tick the "accept" button without fully understanding what it means in the event they roll out.

You are on your own here. Every one you'll ever meet on crypto forums is 99% of the time trying to get you to buy whatever shiny butt coin it is that they are holding. There are no exceptions to this rule.

The UI/UX team's salaries need to be justified.

Nothing Apple says about this modern day surveillance tool will make me more accepting of it. If you think this isn't about establishing complete control of your communications, you are a fool. If you think this about protecting the children, you are a bigger fool.

I do not want AI making such decisions affecting humans. No matter how good it is. I also don't want John from Apple looking at my profile and assigning me a score on a scale of 1-10 of how "pedo" am likely to actually be.

What I actually want is for people to stop thinking that technology will solve every human problem we have.

You have to be either naive, conceited or just lazy (avoiding the real work) to actually believe this is possible.

Am sure they have promo videos for their clients (governments/health orgs). Unless there is a direct-to-consumer vaccine on the market that am not aware of.

Ah yes, sorry about that. Had a brain fart moment. I actually meant the chat section on the right was disabled during the live conference.

Though, after any ordinary live stream has ended the chats usually are retained as chat history or comments if you will.

Well that's just your own personal opinion. I consider real time audience feedback to hold some intrinsic value to the live presentation. The fact that you think that enabling comments would result in a net loss means that at the very least there is something to be afraid of.

They are banking on the power of the normies not being aware of such power tools, let alone having the patience/competence to go through those workarounds. And they are right. Normies don't usually care/bother, they will just order that Windows 11 laptop.

It's kind of funny. I recall watching the recent Apple developer conference live on Youtube and the comments section had been turned off. What are these giant tech companies afraid of?

The TV always has been a stationary device. But now you can carry it with you everywhere you go in the form of a Netflix-capable device ala smartphone/laptop.

Why not use Private DNS feature with an ad-blocking provider like adguard? Not sure if you have the option but you can as well control internet connection per app at the system level too. This last option might be available for android 11+ I think.

> You're not being 'censored' .. It's not a violation of your free speech... You're free to petition

The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.

> It's a private company owned by private citizens who also have the same constitutional rights.

The scale at which Google operates today, anything short of defining some of its popular products as public utilities would be disingenuous.

> Access to Google Drive is not a 'right'

Except this is not a Google drive (the product) access issue. It is an access to information issue, if you look at it fundamentally.

While true restoring privacy has implicit costs. Maybe the author shouldn't have explicitly mentioned money as one of them. I find costs such as "paying more" because you aren't participating in the ad-tracking carousel. Opportunity costs such as opting out of referral codes/links that save 5% on checkout etc. Cost of time, by taking the longer route to access a page in a cleaner non-tracked form. Etc.

Most of the tools that attempt to restore privacy are free open community-driven projects such as pi-hole. Maybe the observed distinction is a marker of class, but money isn't nearly important in the equation for most privacy-seeking folk.

Okay, maybe it is now time for Biden to agree to a sit down with Putin on this menace.

ION We may have underestimated the depth of the solarwind attack back in late last year.

Misinformation and scarcity of quality information on social media platforms was bound to happen when these platforms hit critical mass. Moderating SM is damn near impossible to do effectively. It is also easy to game SM. From fake clicks/views (bots) to old accounts used for astroturfing etc, the information market is not at a level playing field.

And since they are all run on some form of hyper-intelligent ML algorithm, none of it from a user perspective is intuitive anymore.

The bigger risk in my opinion is how SM and use of it on digital devices has impacted human behavior. More specifically, psychologically. Dopamine hits and instant gratification must have rewired our brains in the past ~2 decades.

Hate to break it to ya but the court of public opinion is strongly held by other platforms, most notably Twitter.

Assuming you have gone through this [0] and it did(n't) click for you.

I'm equally not so convinced on this anonymous ad system they claim to have built. The browser claims to generate an adID based on your history but encrypt this info to the advertiser. Maybe someone who has actually interacted with the ad platform can provide more insight on what information is exposed.

Zero-knowledge advertising sounds practically like an oxymoron to me, but hey they claim to have made it work.

[0] https://brave.com/themis/

This scam is genius if it were targeted selectively to unsuspecting users such as old folks owning Ledger devices. I could totally see why ol grandma would send "back" her device to these crooks.

As a non-American I can tell you how dead wrong this notion is. This might have been true in the mid-2000's when social media was still relatively new (and mostly Western). As it cascaded into other parts of the world, the novelty died off. In fact, to the contrary we are seeing more and more localization of content on social media and other digital platforms. A good example here is Tiktok in user generated content that has geographic & linguistic boundaries. Film, music & other sub-cultures have a much more powerful rubbing effect on pushing subtle American culture than SM.

Not happening. All those anti-tracking measures break websites more often than not.

Down in SA

> You can neuter it with JTAG

At the risk of having a non-functional processor and probably sub optimal reliability.

The statement on Wikipedia is accurate. Whether you trust the information or not is neither here nor there. Several sources back up the assertion. Further down, it adds that even Google itself tried to get rid of ME and couldn't.

Google failed with glasses. And cars is slightly out of the picture, they don't have any expertise on that front. Apple does one job and does it very well. Commoditize quality hardware options with top-notch user experience.

You can't remove it, really. Check section on "Disabling the ME"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Management_Engine

The most secret of government agencies use Intel chips.