mox

This is business financial news, not technology.

Nobody said it was the same thing as listening in the background. It's still relevant and important.

I trust that most adults understand the implications of an exploitable permission and a strong incentive to abuse it, as well as the track record of corporate denials.

"Meta does not use your phone's microphone for ads and we've been public about this for years," the statement read.

Meanwhile:

My guess: A lot of people are fed up with late-stage capitalism reaching its tendrils into everything good and turning it into dystopian garbage, and are justifiably wary of monetization taking root in one of the few online spaces that they still enjoy.

It would be neat to compare these new reflective LCDs with the 25-year-old ones used in the Game Boy Color.

You literally said that.

I wrote several paragraphs in a conversation spanning multiple comments, and you picked out a tiny fragment of one sentence, stripped it of context, and somehow reinterpreted it into a suggestion that forums and wikis are a replacement for an OS "just working". That's your straw man, not mine.

Bye bye.

TechTechPotato: AnandTech has Closed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ud6DWmWcHaY

What are you on about?

When legislation aiming to restrict people's rights fails to pass, it is very common for legislators/governments to try again shortly thereafter, and then again, and again, until some version of it eventually does pass. With each revision, some wording might be replaced, or weak assurances added, or the most obvious targets changed to placate the loudest critics. It might be broken up in to several parts, to be proposed separately over time. But the overall goal remains the same. This practice is (part of) why vigilance and voting are so important in democracies.

There's nothing "deep state" about it. It's plainly visible, on the record, and easily verifiable.

As someone who knows two people that worked for the Swiss government closely

This is an appeal to authority (please look it up) and a laughably weak one at that.

There is no big plan to weaken encryption or anything.

You obviously have not been keeping up with events surrounding this topic over the past 30 years.

Not against a government that can compel the organizations who issue the https certificates and run the https servers. And not against leaks that occur outside of https.

The Tor network cannot protect against that, because the attack circumvents it. Certain tools, like the Tor browser, do have protection against it (as much as they can) when you use them correctly, but they cannot keep users from inadvertently opening a link in some other tool. Nor can they protect against other software on a user's device, like a spyware keyboard or the OS provider working with law enforcement.