Interested in the intersections between policy, law and technology. Programmer, lawyer, civil servant, orthodox Marxist. Blind.
Interesado en la intersección entre la política, el derecho y la tecnología. Programador, abogado, funcionario, marxista ortodoxo. Ciego.
Yes, for example I donate to thunderbird since I find it useful. And I wouldn’t mind donating to Firefox either provided they wouldn’t do this sort of fuckery.
though in the long run we need to overturn capitalism of course, and that an economic model is viable doesn’t mean we should sustain it or justify it.
It depends, but mostly no. And if that means some sites are not economically possible, so be it.
This is bullshit. The total amount of advertising I want is zero. The total amount I want of tracking is zero. The total amount of experiments I want run on my data without consent is, guess, zero.
Can’t happen soon enough.
Very informative. On paragraphs 61 and following, it clearly explains why the Israeli claims on human shields are improper and how attacks are not maintaining the principles of proportionality, distinction, and so on.
I can think of alternatives. For example, the server could keep the user’s private key, encrypted with a passphrase that the user must have. So key loss wouldn’t be an issue. (Yes, passphrase loss might, but there are lots of ways to keep those safely already, compared to key material which is difficult to handle.)
Why’s RFA not blacklisted?
There’s a surprising amount of that, not to mention… not sure whether to go into it but…
Those collars that can control people who channel are also used in a very kinky way.
That said, there’s also a few times when there’s the same stuff on men by women, and, I think, on women by men. But since the Aiel wise ones and Aes Sedai alike are societies of women, well, there’s a lot of that going on.
Fuck that. Not if we don’t make it. That’s precisely the point. Do not comply. Do not submit. Never. Advertising is contrary to the interests of humanity. You’re never going to convince me becoming a collaborator for a hypothetically less pernicious form is the right course of action. Never. No quarter.
That makes it even worse.
And therefore inimical to humanity in general and users in particular.
Not with that attitude.
Aggregate surveillance is still surveillance. It is still intrusive, it still leverages aggregate human behaviour in order to harm humans by convincing them to do things against their own interest and in the interest of the advertiser.
This is supposedly an experiment. You’ve decided to run an experiment on users without consent. And you still think this is the right thing–since you claim the default is the correct behaviour.
I cannot trust this.