txrx0000

10 ms·

91.
by txrx0000 5mo ago
"Entities with more resources" are not necessarily bad, as you seem to assume. In reality, they're not aligned with eachother. This is just as true for nation states as it is for individuals. When everyone can talk without ce
92.
by txrx0000 5mo ago
Bots are only an issue for public posts, not chat groups and DMs where the most valuable interactions happen. Ideally chats would be encrypted, untraceable, and anonymous, except to the people you're talking to. Anonymity is an overwhe
93.
by txrx0000 5mo ago
I will add, for those that lost the plot: the goal was, and still is, to build a world where anyone can communicate with anyone else without exposing their physical identity and location, and therefore people cannot be physically persecuted
94.
by txrx0000 6mo ago
> Telegram less of an "encrypted messaging app" than Instagram was Instagram is not comparable to Telegram. It is closed source, so there's no way to verify that it's doing E2EE. > DOGE strengthened the surveill
95.
by txrx0000 6mo ago
Which part of what I said is the opposite of reality? I'm aware that Telegram is not E2EE by default, and you have to turn it on manually. But it's not true that Elon has long been rallying against Signal. In fact, he endorsed Sig
96.
by txrx0000 6mo ago
As articulated in the author's own blog post: https://obdev.at/blog/little-snitch-for-linux/ The core issue is simple and uncomfortable: through automatic updates, a vendor can run any code, with any privile
97.
by txrx0000 6mo ago
It will matter a lot in the long run. I will outline one concrete way it will matter, which I think is the most critical, but there are other ways it will do damage besides this: Right now, physical ID is only required for government servic
98.
by txrx0000 6mo ago
This is about mass surveillance and control. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Snowden#Revelations The existence of eIDAS itself is already a big problem. They're going to try to gradually push laws to make it
99.
by txrx0000 6mo ago
The threat is if you replace your cognitive capabilities with AI, but you don't control entire the system your AI runs on (hardware, firmware, drivers, OS, weights, frontend), then that's equivalent to someone else owning a part o
100.
by txrx0000 6mo ago
What I meant was that you could combine ideas from those 4 projects to build a new VPN protocol, not that you need to tweak your existing tunneling setup to allow those applications through.
101.
by txrx0000 6mo ago
Apple is indeed better than most other companies on #2. But that's because it's the worst offender on #1. Its strategy is to appear to be the model company that cares about user rights and privacy, in hopes of capturing everyone i
102.
by txrx0000 6mo ago
Cool project. But why tunnel Telegram specifically? This could be a yet another VPN protocol. There are some useful ideas from SoftEtherVPN, BitTorrent, Yggdrasil Network, and Tor you could borrow, if you're looking to improve this. Th
103.
by txrx0000 6mo ago
The user can voluntarily give the platform their age by typing it into their account profile in that streaming app. You can already do this right now. No laws required. The problem at hand is we have a new law that forces everyone to give t
104.
by txrx0000 6mo ago
1. The current norm of social siloing apps was created by these tech companies in the first place. What regulators can do is discourage anti-competitive practices that lock users into specific software and hardware platforms. If there'
105.
by txrx0000 6mo ago
1. Depends on how it's implemented. It won't identify you to individual platforms if the OS filters on a per-app or per-website basis. And yeah, there would be no dynamic behavior based on age, as that would enable tracking based
106.
by txrx0000 6mo ago
Thanks for the clarification. Regarding what to do with algorithmic feeds, instead of forcing platforms like Facebook to be less evil, we should give parents the ability to simply uninstall Facebook, and prevent it from being installed by t
107.
by txrx0000 6mo ago
Assume they're 18+ then. But even that's still not a great solution. I outline a better solution that doesn't require any legal enforcement at all, in the link at the bottom of my original comment.
108.
by txrx0000 6mo ago
There are two things very very wrong with the California law, which you call "age indication". 1) The parental responsibility is given to the wrong people. You're basically being forced by law to give all apps and websites yo
109.
by txrx0000 6mo ago
Counter-surveillance is not a binary switch. We can win by forcing the government to use increasingly expensive backdoors and exploits (>$10k per capita per year, beyond which mass surveillance is impractical even with a $1T budget). Har
110.
by txrx0000 6mo ago
I always remind myself and everyone else that human DNA is "only" 1.6 GB of data, and yet it encodes all of the complex systems of the human body including the brain, and can replicate itself. Our intuitive feel of how much stuff
111.
by txrx0000 7mo ago
The male-to-female ratio at 1500 elo is not 90:1, but more like 9:1. 10% is a visible minority. But I see where our disagreement is. You think there ought to be more women in chess. I think different people can do different things, so women
112.
by txrx0000 7mo ago
I don't deny that there are very few women in top chess, but that wasn't your point. You said it would end up being all men at all the skill rating levels, which is not true. Take chess as an example: there are a lot more women at
113.
by txrx0000 7mo ago
That's a possible compromise, but a high maintenance one. It would set a precedent for other groups, and then we'd have to add a new category every time people complain. I think we should just make the Olympics universal and let a
114.
by txrx0000 7mo ago
No it would not. Look at chess ratings.
115.
by txrx0000 7mo ago
> So you're just suggesting making everything mixed-sex, and having very few women at the Olympics? Yeah. It would work like video game rankings. Top-ranked players are top-ranked because of skill, and if they happen to be mostly
116.
by txrx0000 7mo ago
Grouping based on skill would achieve what you describe and then some. It would eliminate every kind of advantage, not just sex-based advantage.
117.
by txrx0000 7mo ago
If you have a relative skill rating system, then there's no need to split competitors into groups. But if you insist, then you can split them based on skill ratings (define a rating range for beginner, intermediate, advanced, etc). And
118.
by txrx0000 7mo ago
The solution is to develop relative skill rating systems like Elo.
119.
by txrx0000 7mo ago
Ok, I'll give you my two cents, but you'll have to fill in the details on your own. After curated local content, you could get an old desktop (and later a laptop too) and install a Linux distro of your choice on it, something reas
120.
by txrx0000 7mo ago
We have decided as a society to age-gate the purchase of a very small selection of goods and services, but this did not require a law that says all merchants have the right to know your age. And in this case, it's not even just all m

More ›