rockskon

6 ms·

31.
by rockskon 3mo ago
As cynical as it sounds given its frequent use in marketing and often inappropriate use in legal circles, securing what data is collected is important too. Raise the bar for a data breach. It has value. Much more value if the law did a mu
32.
by rockskon 3mo ago
Not every lawmaker is the same and there's more than one way to get a lawmaker's attention. Get more people with you. Or convince a group that's previously established trust in your jurisdiction to join you in speaking out.
33.
by rockskon 3mo ago
Law alone cannot fix it. Tech alone cannot fix it. If we wish to preserve the values we grew up with, we need both.
34.
by rockskon 3mo ago
Such spaces will never scale if there's widespread legal prohibitions. It is foolish to assume we can innovate our way around the law as opposed to talking with lawmakers to oppose the law before it gets on the books.
35.
by rockskon 4mo ago
> Cool, ignore my point about technology changing the situation. I assume you’ll ignore Jefferson talking about how the constitution should be changed every 19-20 years because the world changed. The Constitution doesn't have a &quo
36.
by rockskon 4mo ago
Don't mistake cynicism for knowledge.
37.
by rockskon 4mo ago
> it's actually clear that you are the one who isn't familiar with this, I referenced remote attestation which you appear to know little about as it addresses the problem of identifying information (the service has no way to li
38.
by rockskon 4mo ago
> at the terminus, yes. there is no other way to avoid the homeless problem you listed. by terminus I am referring to where a central authority vouches for unforgability. this does not mean advertisers will have a token they can use (see
39.
by rockskon 4mo ago
Wait - so you're advocating for use of a persistent identifier tied to a person? How is that any different than what advertising networks do right now beyond giving them additional guaranteed information of your age bracket? To clarify
40.
by rockskon 4mo ago
So....what exactly would platform detection mechanisms be basing their decisions off of that wouldn't defeat the entire privacy-preserving premise of ZKP?
41.
by rockskon 4mo ago
Okay - so you verify age and what else? What combination of details can you validate on that is meaningfully privacy-preserving and couldn't result in wide-spread re-use of tokens? Additionally - what would prevent some kids from getti
42.
by rockskon 4mo ago
The first amendment doesn't have a clause that exempts Americans from anonymous speech if it's possible a foreigner could inadvertently take advantage of the freedom too. You may as well advocate for no one to be allowed to drive
43.
by rockskon 4mo ago
It's about as meaningful a framing as asking if you favor world peace and ending world hunger.
44.
by rockskon 4mo ago
Zero Knowledge Proofs are worthless for this. Either they validate so little information that a single homeless person can authenticate the entire country or they validate so much information as to not have a significant privacy guarantee.
45.
by rockskon 4mo ago
OAuth 2.0 is a hate crime against security given its complexity.
46.
by rockskon 4mo ago
Coalitions help. Getting local government agencies on your side to promote local government policy helps. Same concept applies to federal.
47.
by rockskon 4mo ago
Why not look at almost every single interest group that has managed to influence local politics? Ever pay attention to all those groups (private sector or otherwise) that end up influencing policy creation? Ever think of trying to get othe
48.
by rockskon 4mo ago
Cynicism isn't knowledge. Cynicism isn't an assessment. Cynicism is an assumption. Cynicism is emotional armor because the thought of caring again and the risk of it not panning out is more painful than not caring at all. The onl
49.
by rockskon 4mo ago
It represents an increase in cost to use the service. Most such services have a wealth of competitors for your time and attention. "Need" is an extremely strong word that is not appropriate for many Internet services where facial
50.
by rockskon 4mo ago
That remains to be seen. Assuming the worst from the start discourages people from taking any action and is an imprudent way to approach political topics.
51.
by rockskon 4mo ago
This betrays quite a bit of ignorance about what the code created for certain companies is used to do.
52.
by rockskon 4mo ago
Bait and switch user interfaces to insert AI into places AI did not previously exist and make sure you see an AI answer before anything else is not far divorced from the "lead in food" example - especially when paired with efforts
53.
by rockskon 4mo ago
That worked so well for the finance system finding new Cobol programmers!
54.
by rockskon 4mo ago
Because eventually you'll get to the point where you've too much work to do and there's not enough people to delegate it to. Hope you like being overworked!
55.
by rockskon 4mo ago
Oh good lord not that statistic again. Left unstated is what jobs philosophy and art history majors take. There's more computer scientists working in computer science than there are philosophy or art history majors working in philosoph
56.
by rockskon 4mo ago
That various companies such as Google are working to kill. They're an advertising company that is making it increasingly clear they no longer want to link to their competition. Competition being defined as any source of information t
57.
by rockskon 4mo ago
Has it? Spam calls frequently don't have a source in the same country as their target victim.
58.
by rockskon 4mo ago
No.
59.
by rockskon 4mo ago
Fair. I don't have a good frame of reference to know when VCs consider the industry worth pouring more money into or if it's a black hole for investment. Surely there's gotta be some point where the industry has to prove itse
60.
by rockskon 4mo ago
Have many defense investments in startups proven profitable enough for VCs and other investors to continue pouring money into the sector? Or is the sector primarily banking on moonshots?

More ›