eivarv

9 ms·

1.
by eivarv 4y ago
Yes – and not only for government and organizations: > In 1999, NetBus was used to plant child pornography on the work computer of a law scholar at Lund University. The 3,500 images were discovered by system administrators, and the law s
2.
by eivarv 4y ago
Whether people are convinced or not – your claim was that it provided "justification". My point is that it does no such thing – it doesn't hold up as a valid argument (which really is the bare minimum for something to even be
3.
by eivarv 4y ago
It has been illegal at least since the Grand Chamber judgments on the cases of "Big Brother Watch" and "Centrum för Rättvisa" last year [0]. Though, really, the outcome was fairly predictable for anyone following the f
4.
by eivarv 4y ago
No, it does not – for two reasons: - Two wrongs don't make a right: Someone behaving unethical does not excuse unethical behavior from someone else. - There is a difference in the power dynamics of the relationships: Consumer and
5.
by eivarv 4y ago
Yet bulk data collection (in effect "mass surveillance") happens, and poses a risk in and of itself to data subjects.
6.
Echos Are Heard: Tracking, Profiling, and Targeting in the Amazon Ecosystem(arxiv.org)
1 points by eivarv 4y ago|0 comments
7.
US and EU Commission Joint Statement on Trans-Atlantic Data Privacy Framework(whitehouse.gov)
2 points by eivarv 4y ago|1 comments
8.
by eivarv 5y ago
https://cleave.app Cleave lets users persist OS state as a "context" - saving and loading all open applications, their windows (and their positions), tabs, open files/documents and so on. Think of it as a workspac
9.
by eivarv 5y ago
Yes, if you mean true anonymization – i.e. not pseudonymization (e.g. replacing names with a pseudonym) or in any other way retaining personal data (internal identifiers, usage patterns or attributes that combined result in a unique enough
10.
by eivarv 5y ago
Out of curiosity: How does any argument become more or less logical depending on its context? Your comment reads to me as if the concept of logical fallacies is only useful or valid within the framework of rhetorical competitions – or alter
11.
by eivarv 5y ago
Exactly – this is currently a regulatory problem, and blockchains, decentralized identity, etc. won't solve anything in this space. On the contrary, it will by definition enable identification in some types of data. This makes me concl
12.
by eivarv 5y ago
could protect against all sorts of abuse... Could it, though? What's to stop someone that gains access to user data (by legitimate means) to make a copy?
13.
Bugs in Our Pockets: The Risks of Client-Side Scanning(arxiv.org)
4 points by eivarv 5y ago|1 comments
14.
by eivarv 5y ago
> I wish the field of psychiatry was mature and used different words for depression caused by [...] Isn't this covered by "situational depression" (adjustment disorder with depressed mood) VS "clinical depression&quot
15.
by eivarv 5y ago
There is a lower limit to privacy (as a human right) – which after passing, societies would seize to be "free" (liberal democracies?). But that's not a discussion people seem to want to have, when talking about their good int
16.
by eivarv 5y ago
Could someone tell me how that inspection works? Are there researchers who are given the source code? It doesn't (with the exception of an exclusive program[0]). Not only do they generally make security work on their devices
17.
by eivarv 5y ago
That's not an argument that deals with whether climate change is real or not – but whether it's reasonable to believe it is, based on one's own lack of understanding in combination with making (reasonable) assumptions.
18.
by eivarv 5y ago
I too would trust a climate scientist as a legitimate authority on climate change over a religious leader or a PR person – but that's not what I'm discussing. I'm saying global warming isn't true because scientists bel
19.
by eivarv 5y ago
Does it actually matter? An argument doesn't get any more or less fallacious based on who believes in it (the authority, in this case) – that's not an argument in itself. It might be reasonable (a useful heuristic) to lean to the
20.
by eivarv 5y ago
My own speculation basically boils down to: Human minds are primarily meaning-seeking machines, to such a large extent that we even create meaning where there is none (apophenia). Take pareidolia, for instance – it's likely been more e
21.
by eivarv 5y ago
And by extension, fallacious reasoning means that you have no good reason to take what the reasoner is arguing as true (unless they can a non-fallacious argument) – right? The fact that an argument is fallacious doesn't necessarily mea
22.
by eivarv 5y ago
Compared to virtual desktops, this allows you to close down apps (consume less resources) as well as maintain multiple working context-specific application states.
23.
by eivarv 5y ago
I'm currently trying to solve this and more in an application called Cleave. https://cleave.app Cleave lets users persist OS state as a "context" - saving and loading open applications, their windows (and their po
24.
by eivarv 5y ago
... but the link between user and photo obviously exists somewhere in Apple's system.
25.
by eivarv 5y ago
Legality aside – how is this not a privacy risk? Privileged users of the infrastructure can gain information about users (whether they possess CSAM that's in the hash-database... for now).
26.
by eivarv 5y ago
NRKbeta, the tech vertical of the Norwegian public broadcaster NRK, actually did the manual version of this a few years back [0-1], but found it hard to conclude with success or failure based on the evidence they gathered. [0]: https:&#x2F
27.
by eivarv 5y ago
Maybe not, but you could show it to people whose context reveal that they might be interested – e.g. searching for "IDE" or "Elixir", reading about developer tools, etc. This is known as contextual advertising. Surveilla
28.
by eivarv 5y ago
More context: https://www.forbrukerradet.no/side/new-report-details-threat...
29.
by eivarv 5y ago
It does require an active choice/opt-in on the part of the data subject where your legal basis is consent. It defines consent as “freely given, specific, informed and unambiguous” given by a “clear affirmative action.” Pre-ticked boxes
30.
by eivarv 5y ago
In the cases you list, you have other legal basis for processing than consent – i.e. legitimate interest – but that doesn't mean it's not personal data. Indeed, IP-addresses are considered [0] personal data in some cases – which o

More ›