fanso99

5 ms·

1.
by fanso99 4y ago
This is news to me. Was the customer list also stolen? Specifically, customer records linked to individual vaults? My concern with anyone identifying themselves as being affected by this breach is that a 3rd party would be able to collect a
2.
by fanso99 4y ago
They are owned by LogMeIn, which is a pretty shady company in my book (not malicious necessarily, but not transparent).
3.
by fanso99 4y ago
Please stop commenting whether you are a LastPass user or not. Some of your profiles on HN have an email address and in general all your comments are public so can be mined, plus "rich techies" could be prime targets for more dire
4.
by fanso99 4y ago
> That consent was granted the day they accepted/sent the friend request. [...] They can do with that information as they please, which includes giving it to a 3rd party. Hm - no. If I accept a friend request I allow that user to re
5.
by fanso99 4y ago
> While I don't know what the prompt exactly said, I bet it was specific enough. An informed consent from users who's information is going to be collected. In this case it was the friends of the person signing up. Again, that&#
6.
by fanso99 4y ago
The main perpetrator in this case - Alexandr Kogan (now Spectre) - is now a tech entrepreneur leading a company with an investment from a US-based accelerator 43 North. That's how we punish them.
7.
by fanso99 4y ago
I am not buying this. It's borderline victim-blaming. An informed consent must be required. Giving access to an app is not the same as sharing your password with them and explicitly allowing them to do anything they want. Saying that,
8.
by fanso99 4y ago
Semantic Web 3.0 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Web
9.
by fanso99 4y ago
I might be remembering the details wrong, but wasn't the main issue that users half-knowingly allowed spying on their friends without any consent required from those friends? Open API isn't the reason this abuse happened IMO - Fac
10.
by fanso99 4y ago
I might be wrong, but I always lean towards this being the result of prioritization. Most engineers know the difference but prioritize other aspects than ethical. I am not even judging that, just describing. After all, implementing a dark U
11.
by fanso99 4y ago
Because looking back at the decades of your work while being retired is just a sweet ethical exercise with very few direct personal and financial consequences. If you are an engineer employing dark UX patterns _today_ you must look at yours
12.
by fanso99 4y ago
No, probably just special treatment: https://twitter.com/whalechart/status/1606293657518080001
13.
by fanso99 4y ago
Intentional in the sense that you understand that you are exaggerating and still repeatedly do it. No one is calling for him to be flogged or beheaded in front of the White House. Jailing a fugitive, a flight risk financial scammer is not u
14.
by fanso99 4y ago
Honestly, that's not a great example. Re-evaluating your ethical impact on the world is not the same as understanding the direct consequences of your daily work. Both are important, but really different. After all we are not discussing
15.
by fanso99 4y ago
So then who is the abuser? The users and the developers are the victims. PMs are likely also the victims of their higher-ups, their higher-ups are the victims of the CEO, the CEO is the victim of the shareholders, the shareholders are... th
16.
by fanso99 4y ago
There is an argument to be made that these… micro services were a part of a bigger offering from Google. Maybe by itself Reader wasn’t a billion dollar business, but together with other niche features Reader attracted an influential and wea
17.
by fanso99 4y ago
The comment you are replying to did not say that he should be denied bail. Only that the rules should apply to him too. 10% is the most common requirement, he didn't meet it.
18.
by fanso99 4y ago
I would guess that there are so many Stanford-affiliated people and so few properties on the market that this fact is not a limiting one.
19.
by fanso99 4y ago
People are upset that he is getting special treatment. Again. He doesn't deserve it.
20.
by fanso99 4y ago
You are intentionally exaggerating this situation. People are calling for him to be jailed — a perfectly reasonable call.
21.
by fanso99 4y ago
Obviously in terms of the overall contents they are not the same - even eventually. Alcohol contents can be the same but the rest of the drink can not be discarded from the equation. For example, my body react poorly to high amounts of suga
22.
by fanso99 4y ago
You have most likely done that already… but have you tried many different kinds of alcoholic drinks? Beer affects me exactly as you describe it so I almost never drink it. Single malt scotch, on the other hand, has a very different effect -
23.
by fanso99 4y ago
I can't tell if you are trolling or are serious. Neither Opera nor Vivaldi have succeeded as social media platforms. They experiment a lot with different features but remain a minuscule niche browser. If that's the inspiration fo
24.
by fanso99 4y ago
You are misunderstanding federalization. People can migrate their account and social graph to a different instance _only_ if the current instance allows them to do that. If you are banned from Mozilla.social - you can't migrate. The in
25.
by fanso99 4y ago
I imagine the reason they are so keen to be a player in social media is because someone at Mozilla really pushes the idea that there is a community around Firefox (sure, Thunderbird, MDN, etc). There is no community. People who use a browse
26.
by fanso99 4y ago
Yes. I don't think they should invest into social media experiments. In my opinion they did a horrible job at that so far (Pocket was promising but is unusable because of its "social sharing" confusion). Social media introduc
27.
by fanso99 4y ago
They literally say in the first sentence that they will run a public instance on Mozilla.Social. This means they will own that instance. You could argue that no one owns anything exclusively in today's federalized world but that is no
28.
by fanso99 4y ago
Yes, with one caveat: without algorithmic feeds users tend to form natural circles just like in real life. This dramatically reduces toxicity. Just let people post whatever they want and follow whoever they want. If a social media company w
29.
by fanso99 4y ago
I think a big part (if not the most critical one) of this deterioration is the addition of algorithmic feeds. As soon as a company starts prioritizing content, it breaks the natural flow of a conversation we have in real life. This leads to
30.
by fanso99 4y ago
Why does a browser company need to own a social media space? I am an avid Firefox user but don't see any pragmatic point in this "exploration". Maybe they want to own their instance and therefore control their identity? That

More ›