glsdfgkjsklfj

hint: the same way attribution happened in the early days.

google sends id abc to shoes.com and id xyz to news.com. both sends those ids back to google's own adserver. presto, google knows you are seeing those two ads.

well, google consumer products are not exactly know for being "premium" in anything.

to be honest, any moderm AP will do the job. processing power increased by a lot recently and the spec is mostly just narrowing down what enterprise gear used to do for years as an "extra". e.g. wifi6 (ax) is just officializing beam forming that every premium ap had since wifi-n but was not part of the spec.

praising unifi you are just suffering from new-shiny-toy-syndrome. Specially because your unifi AP is the only (few?) product on the market that requires a second appliance to work (and don't even get me started on running the controller on a vm with outdated dependencies, out of sync open source code, and broken mongoDB implementation) to not have more than half of the advertised features disabled (e.g. vlans, guest, etc)

right, if you know how cookies and urls work, all that can happen with zero cookies and some query parameters, like the ones google search surreptitious add on every search result.

cookie synch, It's a freaking industry standard. And you want us to believe google money cow will dry as soon as the effort they are leading goes live?

never said it is not widely used or not effective.

Just saying that it won't matter much if removed from the equation.

I mean, if something makes your life easier, you would be a fool to not use it. but that is like saying not having a ferrari prevents you from driving to the store.

btw, the only way to fix this mess and not break the internet in the short term is to fix the UI. not the black magic hidden from the user.

Just show 1st class useful controls on the browser UI for cookies and the problem solves itself. what EU cookie law should have been.

Every user understands "site A wants to store a save file" "site A wants to access save file". Nobody understands cookies and same-origin and cors.

> Won't AdTech networks simply migrate to browser fingerprinting, perhaps with a bit of server-side tracking?

they don't even have to. Just store two (or N) sets of cookie trails as they already do. This will waste a few MB of storage on the client side and do nothing to Ad/privacy.

Sites never shared the ID anyway, specially since GDPR-et-al.

AD tech works like this: you send a hash of one ID and on the backend attach all the profile info (nobody will ever share that with partners, because that is gold), then the other side just assign their own hash of their ID and also keep all their targeting info on their backend. The only thing that matters is that party A ID123 is known to match party B IDabc. Note that those IDs are transient and set at random, because party A and party B doesn't want to give up their secret info by matching IDs from multiple sites. That is called cookie match. it does NOT depend on a single cookie jar. It doesn't even depend on cookies! why do you think most Ads (and google search result links -ha!) have those weird hashs appended? zero cookies needed)

Another thing that helps even more than 3rd party cookie is multi-site referrer, but google killed that on both chromium and firefox a long time ago (firefox still have the about:config way to disable/set to single-site, set to multi-site-domain-only, but good luck finding a single human who changes that setting by selecting magic numbers)

right...

(tried to add as much as you to the discussion)

that is pointless and show a lack of understanding of the core issue.

first, there were tons of x86 android devices. samsung tab3 to name the last one i used.

second, most of the code on android is tainted GPL code. technically GPL was supposed to not prevent you from running whatever you want on devices you own if it was distributed with GPL based code, but alas, that is exactly what happens.

Crazy how people buy computers nowadays based on which OS you are allowed to run on it, right? Almost feel like the early 80s all over again, but less for technical reasons.

you are not wrong. My /mistake/ is that in most of the world, libertarian means US-progressist and liberal means US-libertarian. it's confusing. i may have even screwed up the terms here as i'm multitasking. look up wikipedia to learn more/better :)

very correct. my bad for forgetting we had yet-another project hijacked.

didn't musk going to TX for lower taxes/less government made the front page some 4 times? Isn't our industry based on companies from texas exclusively because of environmental laws, before they split into production in china/design+software in CA?

my framing was kinda of sleazy and inflammatory (but so is writing a full article about this topic and not mentioning it, instead focusing on bureocracy implementation heh), but saying that it is unsubstantive[sic]/not backed by common sense/out of topic is kinda of stretch.

and so is accusation about creating accounts. i just rotate them every few months because i value privacy over internet points.

the rich always had a use for "art". This just bridges the gap now that the rich is also in kleptocurrencies.

Contribute to uBlock and bring no-ads to everyone instead.

having brave control which ads you see, will lead to the same awful situation when adBlockPlus was stolen for profit: any company could pay to be whitelisted.

couldn't agree more. Brave browser is applying startup "break things faster" to user privacy.

All fine and dandy when it is some curious silicon valley engineer playing with new tech at home, but 'selling' that to people at danger that depends on that tech for safety is huge red flag.

Avoid brave browser like the plage. Specially do not contribute your opensource-time to them, but to the projects they use (not chromium though)

oh boy! are you assuming the people responsible for GPU drivers are going to write what is basically a real time code signature detection and not screw up with ton of false positives to be debugged at the cost of the game studios?

nvidia going to learn a lesson.

first, this is very obviously because they noticed cloud operators are offering these RTX cards and they do not have a 10x-the-price-enteprise-quadroRTX yet.

what they think will happen:

they will blame miners for their production issues, make RTX cards less attractive for cloud operators, sell a truck load of quadro cards to them while offloading RTX cards to actual gamers who then generate revenue in other ways (they do not have those free game bundles deals for nothing)

What will happen:

nerf cards, lose sales for gamers and ML startups.

impact production lines even more with multiple models, lose sales for cloud operators.

cause actual miners (not their strawman 'oh the prices are up' for their production issues) to either reverse engineer the drivers, or just keep the old drivers running and buying the now-cheaper RTX cards, compounding the production capacity.

game studios that started to use those features to speed up crowd AI etc will just slap a "AMD Recommended" on their games.

doesn't matter, your subscribe-and-save shells will arrive late anyway, by tomorrow before 8pm.

> and the device is specifically designed to not reveal its keys,

Just want to take this moment to remind everyone that the yubikey have a protocol to configure it. Nobody knows the code that runs that prototocol. Nobody knows the full capabilities of said prototocol. the best hint we have is the semi-opensource configurator python/cli utilities which are just a bitmashing client of the published capabilities.

thank you.

I do not think it is supposed to be new. Everyone knows the flaws but downplay it by a lot. (negative proofs doesn't get funding and all that...)

I see this as a very funny way to recall what we always knew. Like a court jester reminding the king he was always naked.

> If someone hits 12 of the 14 markers, does that make him a fascist?

as with everything, depends on point of view.

If you are in a region/demographic being crushed by foreign powers, i'd say someone hitting even 1 of the 14 markers could legitimacy be considered one

Likewise, from your very comfortable point of view, even someone hitting 14 of the markers may not be considered one. I mean, you can have that one friend with the racist jokes that even have a couple black friends, right?

isn't a closed implementation adversarial to those benefits?

I mean any implementation can handle the signing etc, as the operations are an open standard. But running the actual pgp implementation on a system you have no access to sources, can't really see the advantage of just using an old laptop to have truly airgapped system (plugging your proprietary device on a connected computer doesn't look that airgapped to me)

aren't those only to fetch/store certs? can't you just pipe the proprietary(?) utility?

everything on that comment was exaggerated for comedy. But the truth is still the same, you have to accept the network latency. period.

anyone promising faster than light communication could very well be claiming a patent to a perpetual motion machine.

They do not have to. Why on earth would anyone have to understand the intricacies of A.I., other than the people implementing it to be held fully accountable for their work?

laws should not care about the means. only the results you want to promote/punish.

What if laws about murder had to be updated every time a new bullet caliber or knife length become popular?

yet that is exactly what happens with money laundering laws and computers. or media regulation. or investment schemes. Every new technology and everyone forget scams via email can fall under scams via courier mail. go figure.

The answer is pretty obvious: by not caring if it is under 500ms delay.

unless you get a Quantum A.I. that can predict seconds into the future... mine just said musk will start a Q.A.I. company with some shady zero-equity A-round disguised as pre-sale. Oh wait that's not my QuantumAI, it's just my tweeter tab.

A.I. is going to be a new wave to legal dark ages.

since the 90s everything that involved a computer was not prosecuted because lawefforcement/regulation didn't have the skills, not for lack of laws. But new laws were created spelling out computers.

A.I. is the same, it is not nothing different from enforcing existing laws and regulations, but because the agencies lack the skills, we will see a new wave of stupid laws that only misses the point instead of proper training and funding of what we already have.

There is zero need for new laws if a company doesn't hire or sell to a minority group, or their products explode, or whatever. No matter how much they scream it was the bad-brain-in-the-computer fault. Sadly, lots of companies will get away with this silly defense for a while.

fear of missing out.

it is not a feature, it is psychological abuse that generates revenue.

I did not read the article as people actively calling the maintainers names. But just showing dissatisfaction that their day-to-day work was disrupted without warning by a browser feature changing.

And arguing about actively offensive people, i agree is moot and not the point of my comment. But those will exist regardless if your project is big enough, unfortunatelly.

My comment is about people disliking (in a sociably manner) the work made by open source corporation like mozilla, and that demotivating the paid coders. That is totaly on mozilla.