that could be, but reading between the lines, it seems that the judges have just been brainwashed to think like the media companies want. The article mentions "users WANT targeted ads" and yet when given the option, 90% of FB users shut off targeting.
Anonymouse
joined 1 year ago
I think you're missing the point.of the essay. He seems to be saying that Apple has decided what content you should be viewing and that they have captured the "free market" because no amount of consumer crying will change it.
Consuming the content another way won't affect Apple in any way since they'll keep repeating their behavior. The author is saying that the government regulators need to get involved to restore your rights on what you can do with a device that you purchased. Near the end he even goes on to say that you (a consumer) have implicitly waived your right to sue Apple for this.
I guess the only option is to vote or maybe not use Apple products (but are the alternatives any better?)
I like the Van Halen brown M&M version. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/why-did-van-halen-demand-concert-venues-remove-brown-mms-from-the-menu-180982570/
Take some time and really analyze your threat model. There are different solutions for each of them. For example, protecting against a friend swiping the drives may be as simple as LUKS on the drive and a USB key with the unlock keys. Another poster suggested leaving the backup computer wide open but encrypting the files that you back up with symmetric or asymmetric, based on your needs. If you're hiding it from the government, check your local laws. You may be guilty until proven innocent in which case you need "plausible deniability" of what's on the drive. That's a different solution. Are you dealing with a well funded nation-state adversary? Maybe keying in the password isn't such a bad idea.
I'm using LUKS with mandos on a raspberry PI. I back up to a Pi at a friend's house over TailScale where the disk is wide open, but Duplicity will encrypt the backup file. My threat model is a run of the mill thief swiping the computers and script kiddies hacking in.
You're doing God's work!
Over my career, it's sad to see how the technical communications groups are the first to get cut because "developers should document their own code". No, most can't. Also, the lack of good documentation leads to churn in other areas. It's difficult to measure it, but for those in the know, it's painfully obvious.
🤔
I haven't been out there in 15 years. I'll have to check it out again!
I don't know the legal side, but employers don't want you to talk about your compensation with anyone. Maybe it's legal, but definitely frowned upon.
Consider what would happen if employees across the globe posted to an open database about their employer, position title, salary bonus and health care information. I'm sure we'd all be sued. How is this legal?
In the US, I've noticed several places, mostly restaurants that now charge a convenience fee for credit card transactions. Double bonus for cash. I've even started using checks again as they don't have a fee.
Jeff? Is that you, son? I told you that it was nonnegotiable, now get off the internets, I'm expecting an important telephone call and don't want you tying up the lines.
While there are a lot of good technical suggestions here, I've found that a conversation goes a long way. In my experience, when talking with loved ones, explain your emotions. Not "I hate this" or "the governments are listening!", but those core emotions. "Having a device in my room that is always monitoring me makes me feel anxious and I don't feel comfortable in a place where I should feel safe." Make sure that the dialog is calm and remains about your feelings until you know that you're being heard. If you aren't, try other phrases or examples.
Once you've established your feelings, address their concerns and feelings (active listening). It sounds stupid at first, but it works. "I hear that you are frustrated when I don't come down for dinner immediately." Finally, propose some solutions that meet everybody's needs and that the parties can select one to try out for a week and evaluate it's effectiveness, trying new things until a mutually beneficial solution is found.
Good luck. Please post the outcome!
Thank you for a thoughtful post with citations and quotes. After reading the whole page by Mozilla, it seems like they're taking steps to show advertisers how they can get what they want while preserving people's privacy. I can live with that. They're trying to build a win-win scenario.
I'll still block ads. I'll still reject cookies, but I feel like it's a reasonable feature THAT I CAN SHUT OFF. I'm still in control of my browser! Great!
I feel like the whole advertising machine needs to be reimagined. I'm not opposed to learning about new and better products, but I've been conditioned to immediately distrust anything coming to me in the form of an ad. Pair this with the mindset of advertisers that they can't do their job without stalking every individual and it's a recipe for a global-level human rights violation.