krono

14 ms·

121.
by krono 3y ago
Fully automated profiling, deciding, and then advertising to as many people as possible whether you are a scammer or if a review you left is genuine. And the only method through which you can discover that you are the victim of of a false a
122.
by krono 3y ago
Here are a few that contained violations at the time when I checked them out last February: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/giphy-for-fir... https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US&#x2
123.
by krono 3y ago
Yes absolutely! Also why I tagged on that call-out of Safari and other browsers. And not to forget that Google has even shipped several early-days standards track features to production of which the API was still in flux. In a few cases the
124.
by krono 3y ago
Many Firefox extensions including the "recommended" ones which are claimed to be actively monitored are breaking Mozilla's extension policies by secretly sending telemetry, injecting advertisements, load and execute external
125.
by krono 3y ago
Its great that everything just magically seems to work so well for you, but behind the curtains it took additional effort from the developers of websites you visit to make it so. Same goes for Safari and some of the less popular browsers.
126.
by krono 3y ago
This AI-Age Robin Hood is merely liberating the stolen goods from their fence. Morally speaking neither party is doing any better or worse than the other.
127.
by krono 3y ago
Fair enough, although it's not as clearly advertised as I'm of the opinion that it should be, either.
128.
by krono 3y ago
Beware of their quite well hidden opt-out telemetry collection: https://cube.dev/docs/config#options-reference-telemetry It's really quite improper to not have this clearly mentioned anywhere obvious.
129.
by krono 3y ago
They sell security, whilst habitually neglecting to secure their shit. Who knows what it'll be that's compromised next. For being offline wallets, their products sure do come with many connectivity options and live/online ser
130.
by krono 3y ago
What good is all this super reliable gold-standard encryption when its provider has shown to be so incredibly careless with the exact sort of information this solution is meant to protect? Whatever security goals they claim to pursue exist
131.
by krono 3y ago
> Creating good randomness is a daunting task - Ledger devices rely on dedicated silicon logic in our certified smartcard chips that have been the gold standard of secure industries for the past 40 years to guarantee high quality ra
132.
by krono 3y ago
A quick glance over the GitHub issue titles should give you a general idea. Whilst I don't personally share all of the concerns posted there and even believe some of them are a little bit silly, I have to say that I do not at all like
133.
by krono 3y ago
There is actually a stage 2 proposal "Function Implementation Hiding" that is being pushed through despite the many very legitimate and thoroughly described concerns that people have been voicing on GitHub and everywhere else this
134.
by krono 3y ago
Ah gotcha, yes, you're right, except that only holds when you are not collecting any other data from the "subject" at all. The major differentiating factor here is that that Dropbox does in fact process PII - convenient stora
135.
by krono 3y ago
False, I will rephrase: it is a regulatory requirement under the GDPR to disclose the fact that you are collecting data, to provide a detailed and easily accessible specification of the information contents, a precise definition of how th
136.
by krono 3y ago
You're mixing several things together here. Transparency is one of GDPRs cornerstones and very much not just nice to provide, but a deeply serious and non-negotiable hard requirement regardless of how you legitimise the data collection
137.
by krono 3y ago
They never shipped out my Pebble Time 2 before the project (and company, for that matter) got shelved. Something I'm still sad about even today. No other smartwatch released before or since has even come close to Pebble's Pebbles.
138.
by krono 3y ago
Indeed, not the publishers are trusted but rather their authorisation of a delegated publishing action taking or haven taken place in their name. The name is inaccurate and even misleading in a way that actively undermines the purpose of th
139.
by krono 3y ago
Reddit does not own their users' content, however - they would also be simple resellers. All that's happening here is that they have failed to monetise where others are succeeding, and now they are positioning themselves to get a
140.
by krono 3y ago
We are the Borg. Lower your shields and surrender your ships. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile.
141.
by krono 4y ago
With the relevance of search results being inferred and continuously trained and adjusted to this degree with the help of AI - the new standard, soon, I believe - using behavioural data from a majority audience of users with typically funct
142.
by krono 4y ago
Now that you've written it out for me here (thanks for which btw, and for your thoroughness in particular), I see that I should have been able to infer your angle from your previous comment. For the record, not that I was meaning to im
143.
by krono 4y ago
A work that is protected by copyright - which most works are by default in the majority of cases - is by definition not in the public domain. To offset that nitpicky line above a genuine question: if I were to produce a work and share it wi
144.
by krono 4y ago
Except on Reddit you also have to be increasingly careful that the person you are wanting to go up against and anyone who's commented an affirmation of agreement with your opponent aren't a subreddit moderator or you'll risk
145.
by krono 4y ago
What I usually do is to select a parent HTML element of the list of third parties using the browser's dev console and then use JS to find, loop, and click each of those toggles automatically in one go. The script would look something l
146.
by krono 4y ago
Curious to know if this also handles that nasty pattern where all "legitimate interest" opt-out toggles are hidden under the expanded details of each individual third party. The only live example of one variation on it I can remem
147.
by krono 4y ago
That's not at all what I'm saying, you are putting words in my mouth. "I'm not paying for the privilege of..." Edit: A continuation of the above but paraphrased from my previous comment: ...being allowed to step ove
148.
by krono 4y ago
If the contract says the code is special, then the code is special.
149.
by krono 4y ago
Paying for the privilege of getting to fill gaps and solve problems on my device operating system that the recipient of those payments who also happens to control said device and operating system refuses to resolve or has even purposefully
150.
by krono 4y ago
They have no terms of service or privacy policy. As I said, their telemetry collection remains entirely undisclosed and on top of that collects much more data than you might expect it to, as the Sentry SDK they use is wrongly configured to

More ›