Lutra

joined 1 year ago
[–] Lutra 2 points 6 days ago

Just clearing up the argument.

  1. The files will be scanned
  2. They've been doing for decades

There's a difference here in principle. Exemplified by the answer to this question: "Do you expect that things you store somewhere are kept private?" Where, Private means: "No one looks at your things." Where, No One means: not a single person or machine.

This is the core argument. In the world, things stored somewhere are often still considered private. (Safe Deposit box). People take this expectation into the cloud. Apple, Google, Microsoft, Box, Dropbox etc - only made their scanning known publicly _after they were called out. They allowed their customers to _assume their files were private.

Second issue: Does just a simple machine looking at your files count as unprivate? And what if we Pinky Promise to make the machine not really really look at your files, and only like squinty eyed. For many, yes this also counts as unprivate. Its the process that is problematic. There is a difference between living in a free society, and one in which citizens have to produce papers when asked. A substantial difference. Having files unexamined and having them examined by an 'innocuous' machine, are substantial differences. The difference _is privacy. On one, you have a right to privacy. In the other you don't.


an aside...

In our small village, a team sweeps every house during the day while people are out at work. In the afternoon you are informed that team found illegal paraphernalia in your house. You know you had none. What defense do you have?

[–] Lutra 1 points 6 days ago

I just read up, and I didn't know this is not so much about stopping new images, but restitution for continued damages.

The plaintiffs are "victims of the Misty Series and Jessica of the Jessica Series" ( be careful with your googling) https://www.casemine.com/judgement/us/5914e81dadd7b0493491c7d7

Correct me please, The plaintiffs logic is : "The existence of these files is damaging to us. Anyone found ever in possession of one of these files is required by law to pay damages. Any company who stores files for others, must search every file for one these 100 files, and report that files owner to the court"

I thought it was more about protecting the innocent, and future innocent, and it seems more about compensating the hurt.

Am I missing something?

[–] Lutra 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It seems like that uses the displaylink tech. have you tried the linux driver? https://displaylink.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=29

An eGPU while costlier, is less cpu intensive, has one cable and with newish graphics card will have 3 or 4 outputs.

[–] Lutra 2 points 1 month ago
[–] Lutra 4 points 1 month ago

Is it because they didn't use a ranked choice voting mechanism? ( said in partial jest)

[–] Lutra 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Why use the term 'conveyor belt'? No conveyor. No belts. Automated cargo containers.

[–] Lutra 2 points 1 month ago

just to be clear, for fear we mentally normalize this

  1. this is hostile behavior from Chrome
  2. what the customer does with the browser, in a sane world, is of no concern of the guy who made it.

to accept that another person has one sided authority to determine what you can and can't do with a tool, after it is in your possession is weird.

[–] Lutra 0 points 1 month ago

then how does it know... that... nevermind

[–] Lutra 49 points 2 months ago

Kids, remember, Google is an advertising company.

[–] Lutra 19 points 4 months ago (2 children)

...and letting users know, at some level, they are analyzing every video uploaded to google drive.

[–] Lutra 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

What proof? Facts?

[–] Lutra 8 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

One thing to note - The science is still calculating. Yet. SpaceX (and presumably others) are allowed to continue and increase what they're doing. This is the bass ackwards way to protect future us.

Its the same mentality as driving in a random direction for 20 minutes while someone looks in the car for the map on the off chance that when you get the map open you'll be where you wanted to be anyway.

It has the potential (and at this point, just the potential) for planet level changes, and is being done by one group. Should I, a random dude, be able to do something that might possibly affect the entire planet, and the planet as a whole just have to wait and see how it turns out?

The hopeful thought that its probably nothing, before anyone can prove that it's probably nothing, makes a bet where the short term wins are mine, but any long term losses are everyone else's.

4
Mmm Hmmm. (www.youtube.com)
submitted 11 months ago by Lutra to c/music
 

Made this. Never felt ok sharing it till now. life is funny that way.

view more: next ›