3 ms·
First, you make some good points but you could have made them without rudely characterizing the author ("...but the gubment could.." etc.) Second, the author i
by donohoe 7y ago
First, you make some good points but you could have made them without rudely characterizing the author ("...but the gubment could.." etc.)
Second, the author is not wrong - when you build in tracking at such a deep-level it is open to abuse. Read the authors bio, he is not a naive techie. This is an area he has strong background in and deep technical knowledge.
Maybe this is the path forward, but Apple and Google appear to be rushing into this without considering the larger picture.
- jmull 7y agoIt’s exactly because of the Author’s bio that I come down hard on him. He knows what he’s saying is wrong, and he knows that if the FUD he’s spreading catches on, a lot of suffering will happen that otherwise would not have. > when you build in tracking at such a deep-level it is open to abuse. True, which is why he should do an analysis of this system rather than this. He could be using his platform as an authority and presumed skills as a teacher to explain the system rather than spread misinformation.
- donohoe 7y agoNo, what he is saying is very plausible and very likely correct. It is not mis-information. It is a well founded concern. I've been in tech long enough to know that what he is proposing is very possible. Other commenters here go into better detail than I.
- jmull 7y agoPlease do read comments by others. There are some good ones that go through, point by point, places where the author is wrong.