that’s the point, to secure itself against $enemy-nation the state will first secure itself against the citizenry, by having a way of compromising citizens security on demand

ultimately governnment only cares that IT can exploit the mechanism, not that other actors cannot do so via the same mechanism

strip away all the obfuscation layers (there are so many lol) and thats pretty much the extent of the thought process of natsec orgs. you’re the threat. its an utterly retarded mind virus thats infected them we can all agree, but from an individual’s standpoint we can only protest and hope to shame the policymakers into a constructive course of action

wouldn’t profilers simply track via the domain tld instead of the whole address…shopping1 at uniquedomain, bank2 at uniquedomain , etc

and in the case of aliasing, couldnt a domain provider tell where the aliases rout to and sell that info as a side earner?

Homogenizing Productions with Netflix’s Slop Cauldron Suite

A firearm isn’t worth much money in the scheme of things either its real worth is in publicly displaying it on your person, and having it loaded

So does MS know what I look like and have my age and phone no? presumably the tenant cloud is zero-knowledge from Redmond’s perspective

this is still objectionable

why does my employer presume it can commandeer my personal property? the only sound policy is to never let work stuff touch personal computers and vice versa. The workplace is like a gas, if you give it the empty space it will keep expanding to fill it

where the hell did my property rights go once one of my PCs got a radio?

I will never understand the fitness metrics craze…I don’t want my health maintenance to be more systematized than observing two or three core principles and letting the rest sort itself out

Can’t show you the old stuff, if we show you the old stuff you wont watch the new stuff

how shielded are enterprise accounts from the data harvest?

Look at what’s really happening though: the state is implicitly saying you can have free expression provided your reach is miniscule/ineffectual. The moment you get traction is the moment it will move to block use of your preferred platforms, or simply hard-/algorithmically ban you - it’s functionally identical to suppression of speech/association

They rely on the public’s credulity when they insist freedoms are intact because ‘only one website’ is verboten. It’s a dirty exploit. In reality, all platform denial should be protested

Its primary utility is shoring up their image as the brand where ‘everything just works’ and op/interop is a thoughtless zero friction process. Compromise that and you lose normie, bigtime. So everyone gets locked in…and you get the walled prison basketball court

If you mandate reporting the accountants will design a reporting scheme that makes the default company behaviour appear environmentally friendly

Something something goodhart’s law

The government likes concentrated ownership because then it has only a few phonecalls to make if it wants its bidding done (be it censorship, manipulation, partisan political chicanery, etc)

Can’t object to what you (normally) can’t see.

Depends on what value you place on your consumption data. I’d argue the scheme participants are the ones paying a premium.

You’re thinking about about it all wrong. Treat it like a 3€ per month sub and a 2€ donation to one of the leading lights/centers of expertise for digital freedom and privacy. Or a €4.50 fee and a €.50 donation. Or €2.50 each way.

I wonder whether it ever occurs to normies that surrendering PII in order to transact amounts to hidden cost inflation

Alfred emerged from the densest part of the eucalptus grove. All around him, his tiny bots unobtrusively kept pace. Every one was in violation of local law, containing not a single chip in thrall to the Department of Homeland Security. While Vaz continued to play Bollywood exec through the public net, these devices provided him with his own network and countermeasures.

Rainbows End (Vernor Vinge)

The government plan features a potentially controversial scheme to unlock public data to help fuel the growth of AI businesses. This includes anonymised NHS data, which will be available for “researchers and innovators”

‘We are concerned that if data and weights are FOSS, people will develop their own tools, which will work for them by definition and not us, thereby increasing people’s autonomy from us. So the data will not be publicly available’

Vendor Electronics Show