The only identifable information you should have to provide is the information you signed up with.
There was a bill in the US that would’ve required sites let you delete your info without providing anything extra besides what you provided to sign up.
Last I knew, it failed to become law. I’m sure every tech company in the galaxy was lobbying against it.
When me and my mates set this up, Signal was only available on phones, not desktops. It also required providing a phone number to a central authority, which some of us were not comfortable doing. With XMPP we got the choice of a large number of clients to pick from. Both the server and the clients were lightweight.
I just had a search maybe you can self host a Signal server, but I did not know that at the time. I wanted to self-host. So that was a reason too, but maybe (?) a false reason. The Signal self hosting situation may be murky. My brief search found some claims that the official app does not support using other servers, and you need a customized app to do it. It might be more self host-able in theory than in practice. XMPP had multiple servers to pick from, and lots of clients.
All those things could balance more toward Signal if your priorities are different, tho.
True enough… but I wonder how this would play out. For example, linked images could also be ads, or hold ads embedded in the same image content you wanted to see, and you don’t know that until you click on the image.
Leaving aside ad-blockers for one moment, non-inline images move the unit of atomicity from a whole page with all its embedded images, to a single image you wanted to see. Clicking gets you an image which can be anywhere between 0-100% ads. Bringing ad-blockers back into the picture, if the unit of atomicity is a whole page and most images are either 0 or 100% ads, it seems far easier to block ads on a link by link basis. If ads end up embedded into the same images you want to see in a more 80/20% mixture in the image, it’s more difficult to block sub-regions, and the advertiser could vary the subregion randomly.
Ah man. It feels like there is nothing advertisers cannot ruin if it becomes popular.
IMHO XMPP is far more architecturally sound
I lost track of the technical status of IRC long ago so maybe it can do this too. XMPP at least, can support true E2EE, not just end to server. My mates and I use that for normal chatting, sending our vacation pics around, photos of our kids with their new puppy, things like that.
It’s worked well. Free of big-tech. Hopefully free of snoops and mass surveillance. I’m 100% sure any three letter agency could get in, if one ever cared to hear us prattling on about microbrews. The point is to opt out of the information dragnet, not to be all Jason Bourne.
XMPP has been the cat’s pajamas so far.
I have heard that called “sludge”. As a generic term for that tactic.
ebikes have indeed limits. Which is just ignored by those morons,
This is becoming a big problem where I live.
It’s part technological, because a de-restricted ebike can hit speeds that human cyclists cannot do. But I believe it is also culture. Before the ebike craze, human bikes and joggers or dog walkers had a mutually respectful culture around here. Cyclists would warn pedestrians with a bell or verbal signal, and would pass respectfully. Dog walkers would heel in their dogs to avoid clotheslining the passing cyclist. If quarters were tight, or the pedestrian had children or pets, cyclists would slow for safety as they passed.
Now add ebikes. That culture is under severe strain. The ebikes are blasting by pedestrians and human bikes at tremendous speeds, 30+ mph. Human bikes have a range of speeds of course. A 20 year old and a 65 year old are very different. Yet both go faster downhill and slower uphill. A de-restricted ebike can go very fast even uphill. It amplifies the speed difference.
I am not against ebikes for some uses. For example, they are wonderful for older people, to make up for declining physical abilities. They can be excellent for cargo bikes. But for an able bodied 20 year old to terrorize a mother pushing a baby stroller by passing 3 feet away at 30 mph, that’s not a good scene.
If you are over 18 click yes
Years ago, I heard of a guy who failed one of the voluntary “enter your age” checks because it thought he was 7 years old. He was actually 107, but the system only considered the last two digits.
A Gemini reference in the wild!
I looked a couple years ago. Briefly toyed with it, made a page or two. I like the ethos, and am about 99% on board. I only wish it had inline images. I feel like that omission alone would greatly hurt its adoption and relegate it to not just niche, but super-ultra-niche.
Oh, nice. Canada & USA have cooperated closely for a long time on regulations for cars, so manufacturers only need minor tweaks to sell into both markets. Hopefully that’ll help.
Oh, I see. I thought maybe I did it by accident somehow!
I bike everywhere when I can. I’ll join the fuckcars group, now that I know about it.
I’m pretty new to Lemmy and noticed that my post was crossposted to fuckcars and privacy@programming.dev. I have no problem with that, but I didn’t do it on purpose!
I mostly agree. But sometimes if a single jurisdiction gets regulation in place, it can be cheaper for companies to produce a single model to comply with all of them, rather than make multiple models. Even if they do make multiple models, it still means there is a supply of privacy-spec cars.
California in the USA has been more privacy friendly than most states. If California would crank up some car privacy regs, maybe work with the Europeans and Canada on a common legal standard, that is a huge foot in the door! It means people in other US states could buy a California-spec car. If the momentum builds enough, maybe companies would say screw it and sell the privacy-spec cars everywhere. That happened in the past with car safety regs. It went from auto companies whining about it, to the same companies featuring it as a selling point. Look how well our cars do in crash tests!
I agree car privacy is going to be a hard fight. Auto companies will fight dirty to avoid privacy regs. But we can push on this. A groundswell of public support can’t hurt.
They could have made it a lot cheaper as a coupe.
Maybe if it sees market success, they’ll branch out into other body styles. I want a car too, not a truck.
have joked … that if I have to buy a new vehicle I am ripping the whole dashboard out.
Desperate times call for desperate measures.
Slate seems to be the only brand currently that intends to deliver vehicles with zero connectivity required.
Do you mean these guys? That’s the first I heard of them so thank you for that! I thought it would turn out to be a European make, but they’re on my side of the pond. A zero-connectivity electric car would be the dream. I like the idea of electric cars but so far they have all been even more wrapped up in telematics than internal combustion cars.
And if you reconnect to get them, there’s no guarantee your car doesn’t suddenly dump all your personal data obtained in the meantime onto company servers.
It’s a good point. Also I wonder if OBD-II can do that. A person could disable the port, but that may make it hard / impossible to get the vehicle serviced.
For sure. We’re in a difficult place. Arguably the ultimate solution has to be regulatory, but we don’t have that yet. All we have is whatever the community can figure out on its own. The more surveillance gets integrated into complex automotive systems, the less approch-able it is for average people to yank a fuse or unscrew an antenna coupler.
is the realization that sooner than later, we won’t have the choice of not using spyware riddled device anymore, as there will not be any alternative left.
I too worry about this. Right now surveillance is so profitable that it gets built into even the lowest end models of devices. It can be difficult or impossible to disable.
What gives me a little hope is the 10% principle. If privacy minded people hold just 1% market share, we can be ignored. We are not a market force. If we can get 10% of our population to prioritize privacy and security when buying tech products, we become a market segment too big to ignore. Thereby it is important for all of us to reach out to our friends, family and neighbors, to help them understand why privacy matters. And what we all lose when we give it up.
or light bulbs
So that no one thinks you are engaging in hyperbole -> https://www.pandasecurity.com/en/mediacenter/smart-lightbulbs-spy/
Does that mean it’s the same as reddit??
No. The words you write here are available to any and all, so those are not private. They effectively can’t be. Even if lemmy was gated behind a login wall.
Yet who you are can be more private. I say more, not completely, because privacy is not black and white! It comes in shades. Reddit, facebook, and other big social media sites go to a big length to associate IRL IDs with accounts. Even when you can use a pseudonym. Their profit model is coupled to this.
Privacy aside, IMO there are plenty other advantages from Lemmy being a non-corporate system. I do not see it as perfect. I do see it as an important step away from the worst abuses of big-tech social media.
Edited to improve clarity.
I like this idea, it’s very interesting. Yet I always end up wondering how it could go sideways.
A one time token (as in per message) seems onerous. A multi use token attesting “this is a human” could be sold to a bad actor using it to allow non-humans to masquerade as humans. We already see something like that on big social media where human accounts are sold to troll farms.