Spotlight7573 @ Spotlight7573 @lemmy.world

Posts

7

Comments

265

Joined

2 yr. ago

Like how nuclear power plants are just steam engines with a different heat source?

The least they could do is bring back the Office of Technology Assessment to help them understand things:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Technology_Assessment

They have the code for their open-source implementation of security keys here:

https://github.com/google/OpenSK

Their actual announcement post is here:

https://security.googleblog.com/2023/08/toward-quantum-resilient-security-keys.html

Is monetization required for a site to qualify as a digital news intermediary though? It seems like there just needs to be an imbalance:

https://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/44-1/bill/C-18/royal-assent

Application 6 This Act applies in respect of a digital news intermediary if, having regard to the following factors, there is a significant bargaining power imbalance between its operator and news businesses:

(a) the size of the intermediary or the operator;

(b) whether the market for the intermediary gives the operator a strategic advantage over news businesses; and

c) whether the intermediary occupies a prominent market position.

What happens when a Lemmy instance gets too big?

TechDirt wrote an article titled "Do People Want A Better Facebook, Or A Dead Facebook?" back in 2019. I feel like that tells you that a fair number of people won't be happy with Facebook even existing, no matter if the position that it's taking is one they would normally agree with (ie not having to pay to link to something). Sadly, I think you may be right that some might take the pyrrhic victory, even at the cost of linking on the web.

I second this. The Outlook PWA for mobile is actually a fairly decent example of a web app done right compared to a lot of other ones, it works in Firefox for Android, supports notifications, and can be installed to the home screen.

I don't think any password managers that don't have that feature currently are likely to implement this feature after the beating that LastPass took in the press about it:

LastPass breach is worse than you think because URLs were unencrypted

Maybe an app might be able to cache the metadata locally but I don't think it would be something people expect to be unprotected at this point.

It's a shame they didn't link to the actual announcement post and are a week late:

https://blog.chromium.org/2023/08/protecting-chrome-traffic-with-hybrid.html

If it's enforced server-side, then there's still an initial connection that is unsecured and can potentially be intercepted/modified before it gets to the redirect from 80 to 443.

The names are public. Per Georgia Code Title 17. Criminal Procedure § 17-7-54 it looks like they're spelled out as part of the standard form that indictments take. Addresses aren't that hard to get once you know the name.

I'm not sure which thing you're referring to.

If it's between http and https, the s stands for secure and the connection to the server is authenticated and encrypted.

It does if you just type in something like wikipedia.org . This most recent change they're working on is so that a link on a page to:

http://wikipedia.org will get redirected to https://wikipedia.org if the site supports it.

This will fix a bunch of old links that are still floating around on various sites, forums, etc and keep people on https, instead of doing the https -> http -> https redirect bouncing around that can happen now.

Looks like Firefox add-ons can be transferred with "[n]o interaction with Mozilla representatives":

https://extensionworkshop.com/documentation/publish/add-on-ownership/

You do have to include your source code though if you use any kind of code obfuscation or minimization though:

https://extensionworkshop.com/documentation/publish/source-code-submission/

They do give you that option for a lot of it: https://myadcenter.google.com/

You can set whether information like income, profession, education, etc is used, + or - different topics/brands, as well as see the ads you've been shown in the past.

This feature that the OP posted about however is about doing all this in the browser instead of doing the tracking on their servers and across various websites with embedded analytics/tracking code. The end goal is also to get rid of third-party cookies entirely, hopefully shutting down that method of tracking, while still being able to provide targeted advertising.

Additionally, it seems to me like you could bind the app that needs to use the VPN to the VPN adapter/interface specifically, preventing it from going out the wrong route.

To be more accurate: Google websites kept logging browsing information, even when using Chrome's Incognito mode.

Ideally, a website shouldn't be able to detect whether the browser is in private browsing/incognito modes at all. We've already seen news sites using the ability to detect private browsing to enforce paywalls for example.

The names of the similar features in other browsers aren't much better but most browsers are pretty clear about what it protects against and what it does not protect against.

Chrome mentions that it doesn't hide you from the websites you go to on the incognito window new tab page and their documention:

https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/95464

They've also had mentions that it doesn't protect against everything since at least 2013:

Going incognito doesn't affect the behavior of other people, servers, or software.

Edge mentions it on their InPrivate window new tab page and their documentation:

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-edge/browse-inprivate-in-microsoft-edge-cd2c9a48-0bc4-b98e-5e46-ac40c84e27e2

Firefox mentions it on their private browsing window new tab page and their documentation (and highlights it actually):

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/private-browsing-use-firefox-without-history

Safari doesn't mention it in either place from what I can tell:

https://support.apple.com/guide/safari/browse-privately-ibrw1069/mac

Their browser doesn't say that it protects you from websites (including their own) tracking you.

Also, they consider it a problem if a website can detect if you're using incognito mode: https://www.blog.google/outreach-initiatives/google-news-initiative/protecting-private-browsing-chrome/

Chrome will likewise work to remedy any other current or future means of Incognito Mode detection.

Having a signal sent to websites to tell them that you're in Incognito mode would make things worse for users and would probably work about as well to reduce tracking as the Do Not Track header.

Generally you use some kind of tool to manage/update the mods and set them to load in the right order. While those tools may also work under Linux with Proton/Wine/etc, each app you launch typically has its own isolated folders. So in order to get it to work, you'd need to change where that mod manager app uses to use the folders that Proton/etc configured for the actual game like Skyrim. That's compared to just installing the mod configurator/launcher app and having it start Skyrim for you on Windows.

The fact that there's a 60 page guide on how to do it tells you it's not as easy as on Windows: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/91500?tab=description

The DMCA safe harbors have a requirement that in order for an online service provider (eg the ISP) to be protected from liability for copyright infringement that the ISPs have a repeat infringer policy to (eventually) stop the copyright infringement of their users by discontinuing service to them. Without the DMCA safe harbors the ISP would potentially be on the hook for copyright infringement. With high statutory damages for infringement, that's a lot of potential money for the group suing the ISP, hence why they would want evidence showing the ISP didn't have a repeat infringer policy or did have one but failed to enforce it. Testimony from a pirate saying how great the ISP was because they didn't ban them even after multiple notices would help establish that.