Digital-Citizen

21 ms·

91.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
Mass surveillance is an abuse. One could go further in exploring additional abuses by looking into what is done with the data (Where is the data stored? Who else has access? What do they do with the data? Is any of this knowable?) but indis
92.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
> What about responsible disclosure ethics? "Responsible" to whom? Terms like these indicate what side one takes, such as how one expands the term "DRM": digital rights management means taking the 1%/elite side f
93.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
What's important aren't really the bugs, bugs can be fixed. What's important is who is allowed to run, inspect, share, and modify the code. If only the copyright holder is allowed to do this, that's proprietary software
94.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
> 1-day notice? Such aggressive wording without even the chance for AMD to address the concerns? Are the reporting parties under any obligation to give AMD notice? Behaving according to AMD's wishes is not an obligation. Businesses
95.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
That software and MacPaint might be more useful to people if it were released as free software: software that respects people's freedom to run, inspect, modify, and share published software even commercially. As it is, there's no
96.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
Perhaps it was about purchasing the copyrights and patents Ring controls, or purchasing the company most likely to cause problems for Amazon when Amazon rolls out more of their ridiculous home invasion plan marketed as an inside-the-home de
97.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
Any netnews set of servers not owned by cooperative entities is more supportive of free speech than any single-point-of-censorship/chokepoint like a website. If a website's owners don't want to carry one's posts, or if a
98.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
It's not clear to me that Veil is better than that plus maybe a VPN or Tor, even for the sites where Veil could work at all. My understanding of Veil is that Veil is an image-based proxy: One gives Veil the URL of the page to visit and
99.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
> They have again made statements saying that this tool was only used against pirated copies of their software. That's quite a claim. But it wouldn't matter if they did apologize. No apology would take away the malware or cause
100.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
The article reads to me like Amazon is cynically trying to escape criticism for the poor working conditions they impose on their workers, even using this offer to get the public to flip the criticism Amazon receives to get the public to see
101.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
When one uses any of the popular commercial streaming services they also submit to non-free software (proprietary software, untrustworthy by default), and tracking. The media one gets from such services contain DRM (digital restrictions man
102.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
From the article: > The real problem here is that there’s no way to know just how much of VPN traffic is growing or how much of it is BitTorrent. That's a show-stopper problem for the entire article. All of the claims made in the ar
103.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
You have good reason not to trust it or any device like it; proprietary software (which is always untrustworthy) + mic and/or camera + Internet connection equals spy device that doesn't respect your software freedom, pure and simp
104.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
Not among the powerful, no. The public gets great benefit from FLOSS codecs (Opus, VPx, AV1, etc.) and containers anyone is free to implement without patent hassles (such as Matroska and the smaller variant used in WebM). Patent holders usu
105.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
I think you're reacting to the wrong issue -- a minor and perhaps unwise choice of words: substitute "strong" for "unbreakable" and the point remains -- aren't we better off by standing up for what ought to be
106.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
> Wouldn't it be better if we adopt the position that unbreakable crypto is a basic human right? Yes, but you're asking a set of people who have not given us much evidence they're capable or willing to implement that human
107.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
The article says: "Sniggering Linux users who believe in open code and open standards can take a hike. The Online Accounts systems in GNOME, Ubuntu Unity, Plasma, and MATE do the exact same thing as Window 10. There are underlying CalD
108.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
With Chrome you face the inherent untrustworthiness of nonfree software. Chrome users always trust Google. No set of preference changes or add-ons makes Chrome safe from Google's power over your data or your computer. This strikes me a
109.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
Perhaps, but like the grandparent post said, one can find other online stores that don't require JavaScript. Going beyond what the grandparent post said, JS is a big reason why websites are slow, insecure (from the user's perspect
110.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
The bulk of the article is about reacting to largely inchoate disapproving reviews. Furthermore, those reviews (according to one post quoted in the article) make up one-tenth of one percent of disapproving reviews. That suggests it's q
111.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
I concur. It's interesting that so many people who claim they understand what the software is doing don't appear to understand that proprietary software is always untrustworthy. Users have no real control over proprietary software
112.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
Here's a few more: Ethics of computing: explaining and considering the principles of free software, practical reasons for respecting software freedom, and reviewing corporate-minded disclosure policies such as so-called "embargoes
113.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
Yes, and for good reason: https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/proprietary-back-doors.html has a list of some of the backdoors found in proprietary software (software users are not free to run, inspect, share, and modify).
114.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
A correction: running no additional nonfree code.
115.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
"The reason why that's unlikely to happen is that companies treat source code as a significant asset, which is why I first mentioned a longer support period. My favorite approach for this problem would be regulation requiring mand
116.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
Regarding "Youtube is a video hosting site, it's not a political platform": politics enters any situation where 2 or more people are involved. Another poster has clearly explained how YouTube is quite fine hosting shows with
117.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
There's nothing special about "video service" nor is that even a relevant concept to discuss and in no way contradicts anything I said. If you're going to claim otherwise, please be specific about this alleged contradict
118.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
IA ( https://archive.org ) offers a BitTorrent feed for each of its uploads. You should check out what IA offers.
119.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
That's quite a claim made without any pointer to evidence. Do you have any evidence to back up this claim? IA has been around for many years and not bumped into this problem. Nor are they making choices that even hint at this problem.
120.
by Digital-Citizen 9y ago
The two cases (YouTube and using nonfree OSes) are not comparable as the grandparent poster and this suggest. In Stallman's case there were no free software OSes. One could not use a computer in freedom. Therefore he used a nonfree OS

More ›