• 0 Posts
  • 18 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 15th, 2023

help-circle



  • Check this out:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Schrems

    Facebook (and the complicit Irish Data Protection Comission) thought so too, an were rekt.

    The case invalidated 2 seperate “safe harbor” agreements between the EU and the USA, making ANY data transfer of EU customers private data to the USA illegal without explicit consent. It was literally pandemonium in the IT sector for a few months, everyone was running stuff in US clouds and panicking.

    This is what makes the EU high court (ECJ/EuGh) special: noone can pressure them politically. They couldn’t care less what anyone but EU law says.

    And that was “just” GDPR, now they have way more EU laws (DMA, DSA) they can throw at FAANG.


  • Under GDPR and DMA, there would be real consequences. Like “being broken up or cease to exist” magnitude of consequences. Why would they risk it for the 1% of users who actually care and set their privacy settings accordingly?

    Google doesnt care about you or anyones personal data. They care about the amount they collect. If the most privacy-aware users wrestle back some data and have it deleted, so be it. Google couldnt care less. Users are like cattle to them, as long as the general “data harvest rate” looks okay they wont investigate the odd one out.




  • I used it too. I miss it, but i get why they removed it: it just kinda breaks the Signal user experience and trust model. This app lives and dies by the users trust their conversations will be private. By having an option to message someone in a completely unencrypted, easy to intercept mode like SMS it risks this trust for little gain (some power users like us liked it). By removing it, the app concentrates on what is expected from it and removes a big possibility for user error while fleshing out its marketing image even more. It makes perfect sense but its a tad annoying.





  • No search engine has a “single point of entry”. Every search engine has Cache servers all over the world at almost every major IXP. Nothing would prevent a federated service from operating the same way. Cloudflare or literally any form of loadbalancer or load balancing service could be used to redirect queries to fedisearch (or whatever the service name would be) to the local instance by IP geolocation. Authentication can just be forwarded to the home server via SAML, thats also where the settings can be stored and queried at login time by the local instance. SAML assertions are very scalable, and there needs to be no global login server, since every users login query can be forwarded to his home instance, where his profile is loaded. The full search index could be put into a blockchain that every local instance joins - every instance crawls their area and publishes new results to the chain. You seem to know very little about how the internet works, yet you accuse me of raging.

    That the foss community can manage things like that has been proven for years. Debian mirror server network works in a similar way (they run their own loadbalancer ofc), while being cryptographically secure. And if you wanna see a federated login network like i described in action, just go to https://pubs.acs.org/action/ssostart

    All these parts i described are existing technology and in global use. The combination is not, but there is nothing that would prevent a foundation from implementing search like this.







  • Its not true. A fragmented playerbase hurts everyone. I was there in the Source vs CS 1.6 days. Source and 1.6 were basically completely seperate communities, which were only really unified when CS:GO came out.

    Imagine getting the new CS only to find out all your friends refuse to move to the new game, so you have to go there too if you want to play with them and learn everything anew just when you learned the ropes in the new game. A terrible new user experience, which hampers growth, which leads to a dying game.

    Updating a hugely successful game is always difficult. Should you cater to the “old guard”? Absolutely. But when they are a contentious bunch who hate change, you just have to force them, or they will paint themselves into a corner, completely isolating themselves from new players. They would probably see this as a win too: no annoying “n00bs”.

    This would be exactly the situation that developed between 1.6 and Source.