What is the lowest score you have achieved on EFF Cover Your Tracks?
Wireguard can be configured to proxy specifically only any requests across the DNS and Encrypted DNS ports and protocols. It is extremely capable of being lightweight and not carrying all your traffic.
Fwy would recommend it; if you feel you can afford what they charge for their paid usage plan(s).
Fwy has used it for our own house; and it serves as the main DNS resolver for our PFSense box running in forwarding mode. Fwy is however transitioning to PFBlockerNG; and it's own ability to block things via DNS locally; but will still be using NextDNS and probably Adguard's DNS servers as backup/bootstrap resolvers once the plan Fwy has paid for is expired...assuming our house does not vote to keep NextDNS.
Either way; it's only like about $25 a year if I recall correctly. Fwy doesn't hate using NextDNS and it is a very good resolver; with lots of useful controls and portability as well as offering proper encrypted DNS service; which is invaluable on weird networks you may encounter when using cellular service or on the go via WiFi.
Seems like it's time to start Geo-Blocking UK users. Ain't nobody with an independent site got the time nor money to deal with the UK's OSA laws.
Until this overbroad act is protested on the world stage; neither Brits themselves, nor their liberal leaders will prioritize repealing it. They'll just shrug hopelessly and blame it on their Tories; much like Americans blame our own Republicans.
If you run a small community website and you have worries about this; make it felt. Countries that enact laws like this should be rebuffed; and their people excluded as much as is necessary to ensure full malicious compliance with those laws.
Imagine if this plate display could be driven by a low-end smartphone app running software that keeps GPS track of the vehicle;
- When the vehicle is parked at home; it displays a decoy/vanity/decorative plate.
- When the vehicle is on the road; at reasonable speeds it displays the "Default" Legal plate number...unless you signal it not to.
- When the vehicle is speeding or near a known ALPR camera; it shifts the plate number to a randomly numbered decoy plate number.
- When the vehicle is parked somewhere else; it chooses a random plate number and shifts that number every 1-2 hours at random odd intervals.
- When you toggle a certain setting on your personal device; it just sticks to a random plate number or current plate for an hour or two. (So you can get out of sight before it shifts again, in case you're being watched.)
No, (f+(0.5*a))/b.
Aesthetics should never get as many points as functionality.
Further tip; Simple Login offers premium domains that aren't listed and therefore have less negative reputation; as well as offering "Subdomains".
I urge anyone who feels they can afford to pay for what SimpleLogin can offer to do so for those features; they've given me a pretty flexible subdomain which I use frequently. Wildcards are another helpful feature; particularly for subdomains; which allows you to "make up email addresses" on the fly and have them routed appropriately depending on whatever keywords you include.
Why not both?
Fwy would simply fidget the spinner whichever way the spinner wanted to spin.
Spin the spinner both ways, one way once and another way later even.
@ #9; Whoa there. 100% is unreasonable. Still there's room to start at a hard 90% at about 250 million and then incrementally scale until the tax is say, about 95-97% by about a billion.
Unfortunately you cannot tax anyone 100%; that would ultimately be unfair and demotivating and only motivate corruption to avoid the tax
Deleted
Permanently Deleted
Jump
Judging strictly by the article; it feels like this case is weak as a wet paper bag.
How do you prove that the diseases you experienced were not ones you were unknowingly predisposed to? Do they have some proof?
Something tells me that this is a paper tiger of a case. I don't get the feeling they're going to be able to prove it well enough. Being able to make the assertions that this case does as facts REQUIRES DECADES OF SCIENTIFIC DATA!
I shouldn't be able to read the defendant's statement and be able to agree with it. The fact that I can agree with it bothers me when I know how negligent these companies typically are. I hope I'm wrong; because if this case flops; it gives them an easy out.
Yikes.
In 1997; I was walking about 2 miles to and from school. Unsupervised. I had a house key on my neck and was a latchkey kid in third grade. I obediently walked to and from school directly from home; meeting the crossing guard a half mile from school twice a day; as I had to cross a major 4 lane divided highway.
lol you are so wrong.
Honestly I question the sanity of allowing a child to have an actual clearanced job and not brag about it to his friends. Mentally you're pretty much a kid until you're about 25 or so if you're AMAB.
I'm concerned that higher clearances aren't checking people for signs of stupid viewpoints before they're cleared.
TL;DR: I think this video oversimplifies the analysis according to the cards and gives Graphene OS undue weight without going into sufficient detail as to why each scored under each category.
I actually don't agree with this video; and firmly believe it is more than a little biased.
For example, the Pixel, AOSP and Android are given several undeserved points due to lack of proper information or understanding of how certain features work. I imagine this is the case too for the iPhone; if a bit less so.
The review apparently doesn't deep dive into settings or attempt to maximize privacy by turning off unwanted 'features' when settings switches are available to the user; nor does it assume that you set up accounts in as private of a manner as reasonably possible or toggle off as many default-on consent switches as needed.
While I would support scoring and dinging each case or instance for "Privacy Settings that don't actually work"...this video really doesn't do a lot of legwork and leans on the anecdotal evidence of scary news stories too much.
Worse was the fact that the entire video felt like they were shilling for Graphene OS; which is known to have a slightly unfriendly maintainer and community surrounding him to say the least.
No mention of Lineage or other privacy oriented Android ROMs were analyzed. AOSP too, was unfairly lumped in and dinged for specific points of the Default Pixel configuration....and yes there are major differences between AOSP and Pixel Android; even though Google tries to be less in-your-face invasive than the other OEMs. Not enough credit is given for the "On-Device" smart features implemented properly on the Pixels.
Out of personal experience; I'd actually rate a proper Lineage OS install of 4 whole Android versions ago to be more private than stock. Not quite as private as Graphene; but not quite as invasive and much more enforcing of privacy. The debloating provided by a clean AOSP-like ROM, such as Lineage, as opposed to a "Stock Android" configuration from a major OEM is stark.
Most importantly I personally feel that the privacy model chosen for the video is far too thickly detailed for an average person. Most of the privacy concerns listed on each card contained concern points that might only tangentally apply or don't apply at all to mobile phones. The way that each card was scored and applied felt low effort. None of the points on any of the card(s) were weighted with average users in mind.
I really hope someone goes into a much deeper dive; this video is basically clickbait that parrots the commonly parroted advice in the privacy community; which isn't even good advice, it's just 'One-Size-Fits-All' style advice which gives the user no room to make necessary 'Privacy vs Convenience' tradeoffs that they themselves could have made if they understood proper threat modelling.
I've always hated Crustyroll.
Crustyroll got it's start by standing on the backs of good noble fansubbers who provided their subs for free; and now they've come full circle. They became an enemy rather quickly when it profited them.
Actually; (basically) SIP over (basically) IPSec sounds pretty correct. Wish the dense technical manuals I read had explained it that way; makes a lot more sense to me as a Net Admin type of IT person.
I do remember reading that the protocol was basically encapsulated. Dunno about any encryption; probably there's not any at the IPSec level. I do know that the SIMs themselves probably contain certs that have some value; I just don't know if they handle any encryption or if they're just lightweight little numbers for authentication only.
If I'm understanding how 'WiFi Calling" works; it's still "identifying you" to the cell provider the same way; via your SIM. The only difference is they don't get an exact location because you're not using any cell towers typically.
I do suspect SIMs and eSIMs are still doing all the heavy cryptographic signing done on a typical phone network though...they're just not screaming your IMEI/IMSI all over open or even encrypted airwaves; nor is a WiFI signal triangulate-able typically due to it's short range.
The reason things like Alcohol are "considered and generally recognized as safe" has a lot to do with their effect length on the body. It's possible to isolate someone intoxicated this way for up to 24 hours and see them recover all of their facilities in the short term.
Granted; it still has long-term effects that are bad, just not show-stoppingly so, and it only affects people who actually abuse the stuff long-term for many years.
I do agree we should be a lot tougher on Alcohol use in general. Maybe not Prohibition levels; but some framework to cut off people from acquiring quantities that can intoxicate them so badly that they pose a danger to themselves and others.
13