fabulist

20 ms·

1.
by fabulist 10y ago
Maybe it's more interesting to ask, "why are penises so aerodynamic?"
2.
by fabulist 10y ago
Why not both?
3.
by fabulist 10y ago
Excellent point, I should've thought of that.
4.
by fabulist 10y ago
That seems to say Google won't share your Analytics data without making any guarantee that they won't _use_ your analytics data.
5.
by fabulist 10y ago
While I feel we should all treat Google with skepticism here, I didn't realize they (and so failed to acknowledge) that Homebrew was attempting to remedy that, so I apologize for speaking out of turn.
6.
by fabulist 10y ago
Add a feature where users can opt-in for periodic reports to be uploaded as a private gist, and a link is transmitted to you. GitHub is already a trusted party where Homebrew is concerned, so the loss of privacy is minimal. Users control th
7.
by fabulist 10y ago
"We use the information we collect from all of our services to provide, maintain, protect and improve them, to develop new ones, and to protect Google and our users. We also use this information to offer you tailored content – like giv
8.
by fabulist 10y ago
Collecting telemetry is reasonably, but it seems inappropriate for Google to get a copy and to be able to identify which of their users installed a particular piece of software from the IP address. So yes. Running their own server would be
9.
by fabulist 10y ago
What about the people whom Theranos failed to deliver accurate test results to? They are the losers here.
10.
by fabulist 10y ago
Google Privacy is the program which blurs (things that looks like) faces and license plates.
11.
by fabulist 10y ago
If you can find a way to use their backup tool to download an arbitrary user's profile, and they don't pay you out at $1M, "BS" can be safely called.
12.
by fabulist 10y ago
Now imagine that without Google Privacy, better cameras, and shot from the air.
13.
by fabulist 10y ago
Normally I would agree with you, I often chide people for inventing problems to solve. But it is a little different when it isn't a hypothetical as much as an inevitable future occurrence. As for refrigerators, I am just as worried abo
14.
by fabulist 10y ago
We will always have to worry about intelligent, motivated people who wish to do us harm. Isn't that enough to worry about without being vulnerable to careless people, behaving unintelligently, who put lives at risk through their ignora
15.
by fabulist 10y ago
Aren't they trained to judge size and distance by eye, though?
16.
by fabulist 10y ago
The fingerprinting could be done server side. Their legal team could force browser vendors not to carry ABP or uBlock in the add-on stores, and GitHub to take down the repositories, meaning you and I could still find the source but not Aver
17.
by fabulist 10y ago
I think the geofencing has the same value as a door lock; it keeps the honest people honest.
18.
by fabulist 10y ago
I meant more, "if they ran a marketing campaign."
19.
by fabulist 10y ago
I don't see this as cheating, but we're talking about the company who convinced people "Rose Gold" was cool. If they told their customers it would be super for them to bring old iDevices back to the Apple store for recyc
20.
by fabulist 10y ago
This is not a sound security strategy.
21.
by fabulist 10y ago
I think the issue is that Amazon has access to their sales numbers. Normally a competitor would have to put in work to infer your sales numbers from, say, an incrementing identifier in the receipt, and you would have some recourse (prevent
22.
by fabulist 10y ago
I find it incredibly hard to believe that Amazon is not a monopoly. This Forbes[0] article from 2013 states that Amazon had more sales than it's next 12 competitors combined, and that it's sales were growing faster than overall on
23.
by fabulist 10y ago
In the words of the Stanley parable, The end is never The end is never The end is never The end is never.... For instance, it's trivial to fingerprint most browser add-ons. What if organizations refused service to people with anti-anti
24.
by fabulist 10y ago
Having another weapon in your arsenal during an arms race does not sound like having solved a problem.
25.
by fabulist 10y ago
Why is this legal? Aren't they using their dominance in one market to enter another market? Isn't that what antitrust suits are for? I'm not being rhetorical, I'm actually asking.
26.
by fabulist 10y ago
No, that doesn't explain anything. Durov has a lot of money to throw around. Okay. Why did he throw it at something silly when Telegram has real problems? NCC Crypto Services would do a lot of good work for a million dollars.
27.
by fabulist 10y ago
CNN is a consistent mouthpiece for the United States Government. Shame on them for regurgitating such garbage.
28.
by fabulist 10y ago
While I share your hope that there will be some service of justice, nothing could make that right.
29.
by fabulist 10y ago
I don't know specifically, but perhaps this commentary will be enlightening. https://moxie.org/blog/telegram-crypto-challenge/ https://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram/archives/1998&#x2F
30.
by fabulist 10y ago
No, you missed the point. They don't want Chrome, and if their aversion could be solved with small tweaks to the branding they'd have probably just gotten over it.

More ›