4 ms·

I feel Recall got excessive backlash because of how ubiquitous and far reaching Windows is, and critics basically live and die by finding something popular to b

I feel Recall got excessive backlash because of how ubiquitous and far reaching Windows is, and critics basically live and die by finding something popular to bitch about. There are already many things that record our data and actions that most of us are otherwise fine with. Browsing history, Undo in any number of productivity software, search histories both local (eg: Windows) and remote (eg: Google, Bing), password managers and Post-Its on monitors(tm), chat logs, vidja gaem save files, and more. Some of the issues floated like the seemingly complete lack of encryption are valid, but the overall response indeed felt very overblown and hypocritical.

davesmylie 2y ago
> Browsing history, Undo in any number of productivity software, search histories both local (eg: Windows) and remote (eg: Google, Bing), password managers and Post-Its on monitors(tm), chat logs, vidja gaem save files, and more. None of these are taking screenshots of your entire desktop, using OCR and AI to summarize all text/secrets displayed and storing them in a single centralized, location, (currently) easily exfiltrated and searched by any one gaining access to your desktop They made the right call to delay and revisit this.
- Dalewyn 2y ago
  Is there a difference between that and the others? I'm not seeing one fundamentally and brutally speaking. Also, if a hostile has access to your computer then all bets are off. Nothing matters at that point besides how quickly you can remove that access if it's even possible and whether you can deal with the fallout.
  - davesmylie 2y ago
    I probably would have agreed once that someone physically having access to your computer was as bad as things could get. Given the choice now though between someone having access to my computer, _or_ someone having physical access to my computer as well as a database with a detailed and lengthy history of every secret i've ever seen in my terminal or web browser, as well every bit of employer or customer data that I've seen whilst working, as well as well ... everything else personal, all in one nice tidy package they could download and search as they pleased - I think the former would end up not being quite as bad things could get.
  - jononor 2y ago
    The Microsoft approach will slurp up passwords/tokens, as well as anything in incognito browser window, etc. Things that are explicitly designed to be private. And it may have stored images, not just text.
    - Dalewyn 2y ago
      >slurp up passwords/tokens So like the clipboard? >anything in incognito browser window None of that is private. >And it may have stored images, not just text. They're both data. Once again: Is there any difference? I'm not seeing one. Pedantics aren't worth my time.
mrangle 2y ago
Explain "hypocrisy". As far as "overblown" goes, there's no other realm of social balance wherein concession to something means an obligation to an extreme. Last, your statement falsely presupposes that most are happy with any tracking / intrusion.
- Dalewyn 2y ago
  >Explain "hypocrisy". Recall is neither the first nor the last thing to record and store your actions and data. Why is it such a big problem? >Last, your statement falsely presupposes that most are happy with any tracking / intrusion. Most people are in fact fine with tracking, it has been demonstrated time and time again ad nauseum that the commons do not fucking care about digital privacy and especially if they are inconvenienced. As for intrusions (presumably you mean attacks, whether digital or physical?), it's not so much most people are fine with it so much as they don't/can't care as it's all far above their paygrades.
  - mrangle 2y ago
    >Recall is neither the first nor the last thing to record and store your actions and data. Why is it such a big problem? Not agreeing to something that one does not want, in spite of tolerating qualitatively similar yet different objects that one also does want not want, is not "hypocrisy". It's a boundary. Are you unfamiliar with the concept of boundaries? I feel like I'm in an argument with a psychologically abusive SO. You imply a defect in rationality via your misuse or misunderstanding of vocabulary. As what? A means of browbeating people into acceptance? Your need to resort to such a non-agreeable tactic, alone, should inform you that your logic is the problem if not your motive or Recall itself. It is within everyone's right, and within the bounds of rationality, to reject Recall on its qualitative differences, on the sole fact that they don't want one more tracker when they really don't want the first, or because others seem strangely over-interested in making poor yet insistent arguments in favor of it. I mean, if it's just one more tracker than why does anyone need it? Right? Or is the singular nature of Recall that makes it uniquely desirable to some the reason that it is rationally undesirable to others? Denial of that nature of Recall is what is hypocritical. >Most people are in fact fine with tracking, Do "most" people have the option of easily turning tracking completely off? Most are "fine" with it? Except the ones that aren't, who are tend to also be against having second to second activity recorded. Right? And who are significant enough that you feel compelled to argue with them here. >the commons do not fucking care about digital privacy ooph, the spicy language. I'm persuaded. >As for intrusions (presumably you mean attacks, whether digital or physical?) No, as the attack vs tracking difference of user data being sent to an off-site server, and then sold or otherwise, is immaterial when the user isn't aware of the nature of the data being sent if they are aware of it being sent at all. With Recall and for most users, the possibility that screenshot data would be remotely accessed certainly falls under the category of "intrusion". In spite of legalese. >it's not so much most people are fine with it so much as... it's all far above their paygrades. Boom

davesmylie 2y ago

> Browsing history, Undo in any number of productivity software, search histories both local (eg: Windows) and remote (eg: Google, Bing), password managers and Post-Its on monitors(tm), chat logs, vidja gaem save files, and more. None of these are taking screenshots of your entire desktop, using OCR and AI to summarize all text/secrets displayed and storing them in a single centralized, location, (currently) easily exfiltrated and searched by any one gaining access to your desktop They made the right call to delay and revisit this.

Dalewyn 2y ago
Is there a difference between that and the others? I'm not seeing one fundamentally and brutally speaking. Also, if a hostile has access to your computer then all bets are off. Nothing matters at that point besides how quickly you can remove that access if it's even possible and whether you can deal with the fallout.
- davesmylie 2y ago
  I probably would have agreed once that someone physically having access to your computer was as bad as things could get. Given the choice now though between someone having access to my computer, _or_ someone having physical access to my computer as well as a database with a detailed and lengthy history of every secret i've ever seen in my terminal or web browser, as well every bit of employer or customer data that I've seen whilst working, as well as well ... everything else personal, all in one nice tidy package they could download and search as they pleased - I think the former would end up not being quite as bad things could get.
- jononor 2y ago
  The Microsoft approach will slurp up passwords/tokens, as well as anything in incognito browser window, etc. Things that are explicitly designed to be private. And it may have stored images, not just text.
  - Dalewyn 2y ago
    >slurp up passwords/tokens So like the clipboard? >anything in incognito browser window None of that is private. >And it may have stored images, not just text. They're both data. Once again: Is there any difference? I'm not seeing one. Pedantics aren't worth my time.

mrangle 2y ago

Explain "hypocrisy". As far as "overblown" goes, there's no other realm of social balance wherein concession to something means an obligation to an extreme. Last, your statement falsely presupposes that most are happy with any tracking / intrusion.

Dalewyn 2y ago
>Explain "hypocrisy". Recall is neither the first nor the last thing to record and store your actions and data. Why is it such a big problem? >Last, your statement falsely presupposes that most are happy with any tracking / intrusion. Most people are in fact fine with tracking, it has been demonstrated time and time again ad nauseum that the commons do not fucking care about digital privacy and especially if they are inconvenienced. As for intrusions (presumably you mean attacks, whether digital or physical?), it's not so much most people are fine with it so much as they don't/can't care as it's all far above their paygrades.
- mrangle 2y ago
  >Recall is neither the first nor the last thing to record and store your actions and data. Why is it such a big problem? Not agreeing to something that one does not want, in spite of tolerating qualitatively similar yet different objects that one also does want not want, is not "hypocrisy". It's a boundary. Are you unfamiliar with the concept of boundaries? I feel like I'm in an argument with a psychologically abusive SO. You imply a defect in rationality via your misuse or misunderstanding of vocabulary. As what? A means of browbeating people into acceptance? Your need to resort to such a non-agreeable tactic, alone, should inform you that your logic is the problem if not your motive or Recall itself. It is within everyone's right, and within the bounds of rationality, to reject Recall on its qualitative differences, on the sole fact that they don't want one more tracker when they really don't want the first, or because others seem strangely over-interested in making poor yet insistent arguments in favor of it. I mean, if it's just one more tracker than why does anyone need it? Right? Or is the singular nature of Recall that makes it uniquely desirable to some the reason that it is rationally undesirable to others? Denial of that nature of Recall is what is hypocritical. >Most people are in fact fine with tracking, Do "most" people have the option of easily turning tracking completely off? Most are "fine" with it? Except the ones that aren't, who are tend to also be against having second to second activity recorded. Right? And who are significant enough that you feel compelled to argue with them here. >the commons do not fucking care about digital privacy ooph, the spicy language. I'm persuaded. >As for intrusions (presumably you mean attacks, whether digital or physical?) No, as the attack vs tracking difference of user data being sent to an off-site server, and then sold or otherwise, is immaterial when the user isn't aware of the nature of the data being sent if they are aware of it being sent at all. With Recall and for most users, the possibility that screenshot data would be remotely accessed certainly falls under the category of "intrusion". In spite of legalese. >it's not so much most people are fine with it so much as... it's all far above their paygrades. Boom