309

I saw this on infinity for Reddit earlier, I don't know if there's a workaround for this or not.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] forgotmylastusername@lemmy.ml 100 points 7 months ago

They talk as if they're protecting our privacy when it's really a global surveillance net. The spin doctoring is insane.

[-] Syn_Attck@lemmy.today 52 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Friendly reminder that Bluetooth has a larger network stack than Wi-Fi. Much more code, much larger available attack base. There have been many numerous Bluetooth vulnerabilities that allow remote code execution or theft of files.

This is truly becoming a surveillance state, in no way that can be debated. That want to be able to access everyone's innermost thoughts (texts, notes, recordings, calendars, contacts, photos, you get it) without any chance of someone being able to protect against it.

Reminder that Google was the 2nd or 3rd company to commit to NSA's PRISM program of feeding American's data for future analysis.

[-] refalo@programming.dev 3 points 7 months ago

I really don't disagree with you, but it's so frustrating and tiring to try to work around all this stuff and use alternative tools that nobody else does, all while you're viewed as a paranoid tinfoil hat wearer. Yes I know I shouldn't care what other people think, but I also don't want to be alone forever.

[-] Syn_Attck@lemmy.today -1 points 7 months ago

Find a good girl that doesn't mind. Mine doesn't care at all, she has her interests and I have mine. I'll sit there and listen to her 5 minute lectures on makeup and perfumes, and every once in a while I'll tell her about a vulnerability or something cool I found, and I know she's paying as much attention as I do about makeup, but at least I can understand the basics of makeup without years of experimentation and learning.

True, it makes it harder to stay secure when people around you don't care or don't know how, but its still possible. Just have to set some solid boundaries sometimes.

[-] Scolding0513@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 months ago
[-] shneancy@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

maybe humanity shouldn't have written so many dystopian cyberpunk books and pieces of media, gave us all the wrong ideas :|

[-] melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee 6 points 7 months ago

Maybe we shouldn't have handed our fucking lives over to corporations

Maybe they're not ours til every single corpo is dead, and you should fight like the fucking dead to make this happen?

I dunno.

[-] LWD@lemm.ee 20 points 7 months ago

"Privacy Sandbox" is just Google-controlled surveillance carried out with your phone/PC as the primary data provider. We've reached maximum perversion of the English language.

[-] Scolding0513@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 months ago

this sort of gaslighting through corruption of vernacular used to amuse me, but now I feel like the withering wojak face anymore

[-] HelloHotel@lemm.ee 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

are you referring to the new “Privacy Sandbox” or the old “Privacy Sandbox”. because if there calling this new thing a “Privacy Sandbox” after the old one lost public attention after they kept promising it for years, I am going to laugh or maybe cry.

what they originally called “Privacy Sandbox”it was a browser feature to remove the HTTP cookie and replace it with a cohort system. your browser would receve signals about your habbits. that you were buying domino's pizza and announce to upcoming sites that you like pizza, but ya know... in a "safe" way.

I still see, "chrome is going to replace the cookie" and "RIP the humble cookie" every once in a while.

[-] LWD@lemm.ee 4 points 7 months ago

I'm pretty sure the old Privacy Sandbox was called FLoC, wasn't it? This is definitely part of Google's continued efforts to kill the (third-party) cookie in such a way that tracking your user activity will still be possible, but that Google itself will maximally benefit from because they're the ones controlling how it'll get implemented.

And given Google's near-unilateral control of web browsing standards, who will say no? Their biggest partners? Mozilla?

[-] Murdoc@sh.itjust.works 19 points 7 months ago

Straight up 1984 Newspeak, where the Ministry of Truth is really concerned with lies, the Ministry of Peace is concerned with war, the Ministry of Love is concerned with torture, and the Ministry of Plenty is concerned with starvation.

[-] trippingonthewire@lemmy.ml 5 points 7 months ago

It's honestly Doublethink.

Whenever Google gets exposed for bad practices, people ignore it. And they believe this stuff is good or don't care.

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 3 points 7 months ago

Bruh, so when android phones are turned off they'll still waste energy locating people and sharing the location. And most phones don't have a removable battery! Fucking nuts.

Anti Commercial-AI license

this post was submitted on 12 Apr 2024
309 points (90.6% liked)

Privacy

32024 readers
1148 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS