I'm not entirely clear on which (anti-)features are only in the browser vs in the web site as well. It sounds like they are steering people toward their commercial partners like Binance across the board.
Personally I find the cryptocurrency stuff off-putting in general. Not trying to push my opinion on you though. If you don't object to any of that stuff, then as far as I know Brave is fine for you.
If you click the Chat button on a DDG search page, it says:
DuckDuckGo AI Chat is a private AI-powered chat service that currently supports OpenAI’s GPT-3.5 and Anthropic’s Claude chat models.
So at minimum they are sharing data with one additional third party, either OpenAI or Anthropic depending on which model you choose.
OpenAI and Anthropic have similar terms and conditions for enterprise customers. They are not completely transparent and any given enterprise could have their own custom license terms, but my understanding is that they generally will not store queries or use them for training purposes. You'd better seek clarification from DDG. I was not able to find information on this in DDG's privacy policy.
Obviously, this is not legal advice, and I do not speak for any of these companies. This is just my understanding based on the last time I looked over the OpenAI and Anthropic privacy policies, which was a few months ago.
Oh yes, definitely. I think this is why Mozilla has not made this the default behavior in Firefox; there will always be the risk of false-positives breaking copied links, so it's important that people know that there's some kind of mutation happening.
ClearURLs uses a JSON file with site-specific regex patterns and rules. In theory I could customize this for myself, or better yet submit a pull request on their GitHub. If I have time I'll look into it.
Yeah, I wouldn't be too confident in Facebook's implementation, and I certainly don't believe that their interests are aligned with their users'.
That said, it seems like we're reaching a turning point for big tech, where having access to private user data becomes more of a liability than an asset. Having access to the data means that they will be required by law to provide that data to governments in various circumstances. They might have other legal obligations in how they handle, store, and process that data. All of this comes with costs in terms of person-hours and infrastructure. Google specifically cited this is a reason they are moving Android location history on-device; they don't want to deal with law enforcement constantly asking them to spy on people. It's not because they give a shit about user privacy; it's because they're tired of providing law enforcement with free labor.
I suspect it also helps them comply with some of the recent privacy protection laws in the EU, though I'm not 100% sure on that. Again, this is a liability issue for them, not a user-privacy issue.
Also, how much valuable information were they getting from private messages in the first place? Considering how much people willingly put out in the open, and how much can be inferred simply by the metadata they still have access to (e.g. the social graph), it seems likely that the actual message data was largely redundant or superfluous. Facebook is certainly in position to measure this objectively.
The social graph is powerful, and if you really care about privacy, you need to worry about it. If you're a journalist, whistleblower, or political dissident, you absolutely do not want Facebook (and by extension governments) to know who you talk you or when. It doesn't matter if they don't know what you're saying; the association alone is enough to blow your cover.
The metadata problem is common to a lot of platforms. Even Signal cannot use E2EE for metadata; they need to know who you're communicating with in order to deliver your messages to them. Signal doesn't retain that metadata, but ultimately you need to take their word on that.
The lengths people will go to just to avoid learning how to properly cook vegetables...
This is correct, albeit not universal.
KDE has a predefined schedule for "release candidates", which includes RC2 later this month. So "RC1" is clearly not going to be the final version. See: https://community.kde.org/Schedules/February_2024_MegaRelease
This is at least somewhat common. In fact, it's the same way the Linux kernel development cycle works. They have 7 release candidates, released on a weekly basis between the beta period and final release. See: https://www.kernel.org/category/releases.html
In the world of proprietary corporate software, I more often see release candidates presented as potentially final; i.e. literal candidates for release. The idea of scheduling multiple RCs in advance doesn't make sense in that context, since each one is intended to be the last (with fingers crossed).
It's kind of splitting hairs, honestly, and I suspect this distinction has more to do with the transparency of open-source projects than anything else. Apple, for example, may indeed have a schedule for multiple macOS RCs right from the start and simply choose not to share that information. They present every "release candidate" as being potentially the final version (and indeed, the final version will be the same build as the final RC), but in practice there's always more than one. Also, Apple is hardly an ideal example to follow, since they've apparently never even heard of semantic version numbering. Major compatibility-breaking changes are often introduced in minor point releases. It's infuriating. But I digress.
There are drawbacks to end-to-end encryption (E2EE). I'm not aware of any E2EE cloud storage systems that have the features Dropbox provides. I would LOVE to know of any that...
Support at least the big 5 platforms (Android/iOS/Mac/Windows/Linux).
Have a functional web interface.
Support sharing and collaboration.
Have a search feature
Sync to the local filesystem on a folder-by-folder or even file-by-file basis
Integrate with other tools (e.g. android file picker)
It's not easy to do all that with E2EE, like a functional web interface, search, and integration.
ProtonMail's search, for example, is limited to subject and metadata, and that's specifically because they DON'T use E2EE for that.
I'm willing to compromise some of this for the sake of E2EE, but I'm not at all surprised that feature-first services are more popular than privacy-first services.
This opens the door for more, as well. It means breaking the reliance on CUDA. Meta originally developed PyTorch and it's still a large contributor. This means more resources will go into open backends instead of CUDA.
No no, you misunderstood. Everyone gave their explicit consent by clicking "agree" to the 80-page terms of service!
!bunnies@lemmy.world
I've been using the free version for a couple years now. If the app wasn't so janky I would have upgraded but now. Camera sync sort of works, but only if I manually open the app. It doesn't function in the background like FolderSync or most cloud storage apps, even when I disable battery optimization. I also can't manually upload large files easily; usually it fails halfway through.
This is on Android and has been fairly consistent since Android 11.
I'm still on the hunt for encrypted cloud storage that can sync arbitrary folders, like my camera and Signal backup folder.
I recently upgraded to a 7900 XTX on Debian stable, as well. I'm running the newest kernel from Debian's backports repo (6.6, I think), and I didn't have that same problem.
I did have other problems with OpenCL, though. I made a thread about this and solved it with some trouble. Check my post history if you're interested. I hope it helps. I can take a closer look at my now-working system for comparison if you have further issues.