LWD

joined 2 years ago
sorted by: new top controversial old
American attitudes about AI today mirror poll answers about the rise of the internet in the '90s in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I was paraphrasing and trying to be nice. Fine, you didn't say humans yearn for the workplace. You said humans existentially require the workplace.

I think if AI replaces humans in the workplace, even with UBI, humans would cease to exist shortly thereafter as our lives will have become meaningless

Mozilla Backs off on Data Collection: Firefox Labs to Not Require Telemetry or Studies in Future Updates in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

deleted by creator

Mozilla Backs off on Data Collection: Firefox Labs to Not Require Telemetry or Studies in Future Updates in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

deleted by creator

Mozilla Backs off on Data Collection: Firefox Labs to Not Require Telemetry or Studies in Future Updates in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago

I've noticed a worrying trend among Firefox fans: too many of them supported this mandatory telemetry for on-device features.

They had never held this position before. Mozilla made a change, and too many fans simply adopted it uncritically.

Personally, I believe everyone should have internal ethical guidelines that aren't mandated by their favorite corporation. Mozilla's recent behavior has been particularly egregious because they push an ethical manifesto on their website and they promise every application they produce upholds them. Hopefully it should be clear to people that Mozilla's stated goals are good because they are good and not simply because they came from Mozilla. If Mozilla updates their principles to suck, then they'll suck. Ethics should not be treated like a religion.

But this blog post is good news. It demonstrates that criticism actually has merit, and that Mozilla can be coerced into rolling back bad changes.

I hope the Firefox fans who adopted Mozilla's silent stance just a couple days ago will rethink their positions and decide not to be so harsh when they see criticism of Mozilla.

The 16‑kilobyte curtain. How Russia’s new data‑capping censorship is throttling Cloudflare in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 30 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

According to technical experts, internet service providers across the country have begun implementing a rule that limits data transfers from sites using Cloudflare to just the first 16 kilobytes. This technique is relatively subtle but effective: very lightweight, basic websites can still load, creating a façade of normal internet function, while modern, media-rich sites are effectively broken.

16 KB per website? What part of the normal internet is that small? What part of the indie web is that small?

e.g. look at the smallest sites on https://512kb.club/

Or is this just 16kb per request, which would make more sense with the following explanation:

Analysts report that similar throttling is also being applied to other major western hosting providers popular with Russian users, including Germany’s Hetzner and the US-headquartered DigitalOcean... [they] are widely used by Russians to host private VPN servers, which allow them to bypass the Kremlin’s ever-widening blocklists.

AFAIK, VPNs maintain a long-standing connection that would definitely use more than 16kb at a time.

New US visa rules will force foreign students to unlock social media profiles in c/privacy
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

deleted by creator

American attitudes about AI today mirror poll answers about the rise of the internet in the '90s in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

deleted by creator

*Permanently Deleted* in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

deleted by creator

How Stanford Teaches AI-Powered Creativity in Just 13 MinutesㅣJeremy Utley in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 21 points 2 months ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

deleted by creator

*Permanently Deleted* in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 months ago (8 children)

I see no reason to engage with, or trust anything created by, a bullshit generator. If Digg claims to "care" about the humans, then making the top comment into a brick wall (which has zero accountability) is a funny way of showing it.

But then again, I'm sure their privacy policy also says they care about your privacy.

*Permanently Deleted* in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 179 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (29 children)

this would-be Reddit competitor, built for the AI era

Oh no...

The founders think that the internet is being flooded with bots and AI agents, which will create demand for online communities like Digg that foster real human connections.

Okay, Digg has my cautious attention...

Beneath posts, Digg is leveraging AI to summarize the article’s content.

And they lost me.

American attitudes about AI today mirror poll answers about the rise of the internet in the '90s in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 months ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (15 children)

deleted by creator

157
DHS allows surveillance based on sexual orientation. Reddit's privacy moderators ban any mention of it (lemm.ee)
submitted 4 months ago by [email protected] to c/privacy
24 comments fedilink
 

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/60365167

Case 1

Original post

Moderator carrotcypher says "removed for paywall." When asked about which rule this breaks, receives no response. The post is then locked.

Case 2

Original post

Same as the first, except this time there is no paywall - the link is to a freely accessible advocate.com page.

It is censored with no explanation.

Case 3

Original post

Same as Case 2, moderators censor the post and leave no explanation.

Case 4

Original post

This one is finally given a removal reason: a rule that does not exist in the sidebar, and seems to have nothing to do with the post ("Your post has been removed for being too specific to a company or single product.")

But in a censored comment, the OP of the post says they received a different removal reason:

Holy shit I'm banned for 30 days for "conspiracy spreading". This sub is cooked

This time, other people notice the censorship and the nonsensical nature of the official removal reason.

Since this removal, there has been no further post of this news in r/privacy. Sources tell me the moderators refuse to explain their decision.

88
DHS allows surveillance based on sexual orientation. Reddit's privacy moderators ban any mention of it (lemm.ee)
 

Case 1

Original post

Moderator carrotcypher says "removed for paywall." When asked about which rule this breaks, receives no response. The post is then locked.

Case 2

Original post

Same as the first, except this time there is no paywall - the link is to a freely accessible advocate.com page.

It is censored with no explanation.

Case 3

Original post

Same as Case 2, moderators censor the post and leave no explanation.

Case 4

Original post

This one is finally given a removal reason: a rule that does not exist in the sidebar, and seems to have nothing to do with the post ("Your post has been removed for being too specific to a company or single product.")

But in a censored comment, the OP of the post says they received a different removal reason:

Holy shit I'm banned for 30 days for "conspiracy spreading". This sub is cooked

This time, other people notice the censorship and the nonsensical nature of the official removal reason.

Since this removal, there has been no further post of this news in r/privacy. Sources tell me the moderators refuse to explain their decision.

444
Madison Square Garden Bans Fan After Surveillance System IDs Him as a Critic of Its CEO (gizmodo.com)
submitted 4 months ago by [email protected] to c/privacy
17 comments fedilink
 

I discovered this article after it was censored from the Reddit privacy community.

Thank goodness there are still some places where you are allowed to criticize the rich and powerful.

62
r/privacy moderator censors criticism of CEO James Dolan (lemm.ee)
 

Original post

This action was taken under an unannounced rule that can label and censor criticism of anyone or anything with "FUD."

You'll find it's only used to protect the rich and powerful, though.

Unable to simply delete the post, the moderators scrubbed comments from anyone who named and shamed CEO James Dolan, but allowed his supporters to remain uncensored.

James Dolan is a thin-skinned billionaire crybaby who runs Madison Square Garden like it’s his own little surveillance state. The fact that he's using facial recognition tech to ban people—not for crimes, not for safety concerns—but for criticizing him is some straight-up dictator energy.........This isn’t just petty. It’s dangerous. It’s the kind of fascist-lite garbage we’ve been warning about for years: once the powerful get their hands on surveillance tools, they will abuse them to silence dissent. Dolan just doesn't care who sees it. He’s too arrogant, too insecure, and too rich to be held accountable.

The madison square garden ceo, james dolan, is the biggest thin-skinned pussy I have ever read about. Someone who band an individual due to a critical remark they made and put on a shirt? Pathetic lol.

Criticism of basically anyone rich or powerful was removed.

Criticism of Tucker Carlson was removed.

146
"Age verification" laws are privacy-killing laws (lemm.ee)
submitted 4 months ago by [email protected] to c/privacy
11 comments fedilink
 

"Age verification" laws are actually "upload your ID or get your face scanned to access every website, ending anonymity and associating your identity with everything you do online" laws and if more people understood that they would not be down for this authoritarian nonsense

72
Unmarked Vans. Secret Lists. Public Denunciations. America’s Police State Has Arrived. (www.nytimes.com)
 

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/60174009

63
Unmarked Vans. Secret Lists. Public Denunciations. America’s Police State Has Arrived. (www.nytimes.com)
submitted 4 months ago by [email protected] to c/privacy
2 comments fedilink
23
Inside Palantir’s Expanding Influence Operation (www.techtransparencyproject.org)
submitted 4 months ago by [email protected] to c/privacy
1 comments fedilink
2
r/privacy moderators blacklist German tech news site Heise, censor posts critical of DHS (lemm.ee)
submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
0 comments fedilink
 

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/59705025

Heise blacklisted

The post

After Trump's decree: fight for US funding for Tor, F-Droid and Let's Encrypt

Censored, all comments locked.

The removal reason

Site is NOT privacy-friendly since it requires agreeing to allow them to use tracking cookies on end device for personalized add and content. Now blacklisted. ......... Please use a credible source, and try to link to the original author’s work, not a blog trying to steal their thunder (or clicks).

Why this is bullshit

This is not a normal removal message. Most of this removal reason is from a template, the portion including "Now blacklisted" was manually added and has never been used before.

Heise is based in Germany, where the best privacy laws (the GDPR) are enforced strictly. If this site is blacklisted, then any site can be blacklisted.

"Please link to a credible source" is part of the original community rules, and maybe the moderator who edited the message forgot to remove it, because Heise is credible.

US border security questions are suppressed

The post

Traveling into the US with an iphone: question about border security [question tag] ....... So I've read that you should delete any apps that may have anti-Trump content (social media, WhatsApp, etc.), but even if you factory reset your phone, all the phone messages are still there, right? ........ Is there a way to save text messages in the cloud and have them NOT on your phone (and restore them later)? ......... Maybe just traveling with a burner phone is the only way. ......... I just saw two stories of American citizens being detained at airports and ICE searching their phones for anti-Trump stuff.

Censored, all comments locked.

The removal reason

Your submission could be seen as being unreliable, and/or spreading FUD concerning our privacy mainstays, or relies on faulty reasoning/sources that are intended to mislead readers. You may find learning how to spot fake news might improve your media diet.

Why it's bullshit

Their post is based on legitimate concerns from legitimate news sites. There is no FUD here, there is no attack on any "privacy mainstay" unless the moderators believe the US surveillance apparatus needs to be protected by them.

And if we needed more evidence the moderators are protecting the DHS, they also removed this comment from the thread's OP:

DHS revokes legal protections for 532,000 Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans: https://www.npr.org/2025/03/22/nx-s1-5337214/dhs-revokes-humanitarian-parole-cubans-haitians-nicaraguans-venezuelans

Bonus: mods censor a guide to safe border crossing

The post

"How to protect your phone and data privacy at the US border," by Johana Bhuiyan, The Guardian - https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/mar/26/phone-search-privacy-us-border-immigration .......... To safeguard your phone and data privacy when traveling to the United States, especially if you're a visa or green card holder, prepare for potential device searches by CBP. Decide beforehand if you will comply with a search request, keeping in mind the risks of refusal, such as device confiscation. Turn your phone completely off before entering the United States (to ensure a heightened state of security and to clear the memory) and ensure it requires a strong password for decryption, disabling biometric unlocks. Instead of wiping your phone entirely (which could raise suspicion), selectively delete sensitive data and empty trash folders. Encrypt your device data and consider moving data you don't want searched to a trusted and secure cloud storage, as CBP policy restricts searching online cloud services. Remember that border enforcement can be unpredictable, so these precautions can help minimize risks during inspection.

The removal reason

carrotcypher: Repost as a link post

Why this is bullshit

No rules were broken. Moderator carrotcypher cannot even be assed to fabricate one. (Why not just blacklist The Guardian too?)

15
r/privacy moderators blacklist German tech news site Heise, censor posts critical of DHS (lemm.ee)
 

Heise blacklisted

The post

After Trump's decree: fight for US funding for Tor, F-Droid and Let's Encrypt

Censored, all comments locked.

The removal reason

Site is NOT privacy-friendly since it requires agreeing to allow them to use tracking cookies on end device for personalized add and content. Now blacklisted. ......... Please use a credible source, and try to link to the original author’s work, not a blog trying to steal their thunder (or clicks).

Why this is bullshit

This is not a normal removal message. Most of this removal reason is from a template, the portion including "Now blacklisted" was manually added and has never been used before.

Heise is based in Germany, where the best privacy laws (the GDPR) are enforced strictly. If this site is blacklisted, then any site can be blacklisted.

"Please link to a credible source" is part of the original community rules, and maybe the moderator who edited the message forgot to remove it, because Heise is credible.

US border security questions are suppressed

The post

Traveling into the US with an iphone: question about border security [question tag] ....... So I've read that you should delete any apps that may have anti-Trump content (social media, WhatsApp, etc.), but even if you factory reset your phone, all the phone messages are still there, right? ........ Is there a way to save text messages in the cloud and have them NOT on your phone (and restore them later)? ......... Maybe just traveling with a burner phone is the only way. ......... I just saw two stories of American citizens being detained at airports and ICE searching their phones for anti-Trump stuff.

Censored, all comments locked.

The removal reason

Your submission could be seen as being unreliable, and/or spreading FUD concerning our privacy mainstays, or relies on faulty reasoning/sources that are intended to mislead readers. You may find learning how to spot fake news might improve your media diet.

Why it's bullshit

Their post is based on legitimate concerns from legitimate news sites. There is no FUD here, there is no attack on any "privacy mainstay" unless the moderators believe the US surveillance apparatus needs to be protected by them.

And if we needed more evidence the moderators are protecting the DHS, they also removed this comment from the thread's OP:

DHS revokes legal protections for 532,000 Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans: https://www.npr.org/2025/03/22/nx-s1-5337214/dhs-revokes-humanitarian-parole-cubans-haitians-nicaraguans-venezuelans

Bonus: mods censor a guide to safe border crossing

The post

"How to protect your phone and data privacy at the US border," by Johana Bhuiyan, The Guardian - https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/mar/26/phone-search-privacy-us-border-immigration .......... To safeguard your phone and data privacy when traveling to the United States, especially if you're a visa or green card holder, prepare for potential device searches by CBP. Decide beforehand if you will comply with a search request, keeping in mind the risks of refusal, such as device confiscation. Turn your phone completely off before entering the United States (to ensure a heightened state of security and to clear the memory) and ensure it requires a strong password for decryption, disabling biometric unlocks. Instead of wiping your phone entirely (which could raise suspicion), selectively delete sensitive data and empty trash folders. Encrypt your device data and consider moving data you don't want searched to a trusted and secure cloud storage, as CBP policy restricts searching online cloud services. Remember that border enforcement can be unpredictable, so these precautions can help minimize risks during inspection.

The removal reason

carrotcypher: Repost as a link post

Why this is bullshit

No rules were broken. Moderator carrotcypher cannot even be assed to fabricate one. (Why not just blacklist The Guardian too?)

297
On Reddit's r/privacy, you can no longer criticize Facebook (www.reddit.com)
submitted 4 months ago by [email protected] to c/privacy
57 comments fedilink
 

Original post text

Given the recent detainment of a French person who got detained because he said something bad about the current administration in his WhatsApp messages. It makes me wonder if WhatsApp is truly end to end encrypted as they claimed. How did they even single him out?

As a corollary question, if I were to pass Customs, and if I delete WhatsApp , Reddit etc just before I reach the counter, will they be able to find out that I just deleted the apps minutes ago? I’ll be deleting them from my phone but keep them on the cloud.

24
❓ Privacy Act of 1974 vs DOGE (lemm.ee)
submitted 5 months ago by [email protected] to c/privacy
0 comments fedilink
 

It looks like the Privacy Act might be a way to audit DOGE on a per-person level. Jamie Raskin has suggested mailing them a formal request for your data.

While there does appear to be precedent for this, I can't find much more information about it. So this is more of a thread in search of info.

Here is some from NPR:

The Privacy Act was once a quite sleepy law in my privacy classes. It's gotten increasing prominence in part because there's been so much compliance with the Privacy Act. You know, every agency now has to put out, you know, notices about having new collections of information in databases. And there's chief privacy officers at every agency. You have to pay attention to it and adhere to its commitments, which are to ensure that you don't collect information you shouldn't be collecting for a proper purpose, and that you're not sharing it unless you meet the conditions of the Privacy Act.

view more: ‹ prev next ›