Because it works, has okay configurations out of the box, and I just don't really care enough about the points mentioned in this article to make the switch. I only use it for cases where I don't expect privacy like government websites. As soon as you open an account there they got all your info anyway.
I use Brave as a secondary browser mostly for government websites because sometimes my firefox privacy settings breaks them and since many of them are poorly designed a technical issue over your account may result in hours on the phone to resolve.
I hate meta and I actually went out of my way to get my family and friends off of their platforms, but in this case I don't think they're in the wrong. Even if we roll with the logic that they should be paying for these links, then what is wrong with them deciding to not profit off of the links now by not showing them? Isn't that the right thing to do?
It seems to me the news agencies and the Canadian government just wants extra revenue, and when their plan didn't go as expected they're now just crying and bit**ing about facing consequences of their actions.
I consider myself right leaning but I don't think subscribing to right vs left wing ideology is nearly as important as supporting liberty vs authoritarianism. A lot of folks on both sides claims to believe in liberty but in actually they're authoritarians in disguise because they just want the government to step in and eliminate dissent. I have a close friend who's an anarcho communist just like you and whenever we have these discussions it just stays on a thought experiment level and has never harmed our relationships. Since at the end of the day we agree that people should be left alone.
I agree. I work in tech and having a secret back door opens you up for potentially billions of dollars of lawsuits and all it takes for everything to blow up is one whistleblower.
This is very true. I lived in a big city for a couple years and I still ended up ordering a huge batch of groceries on the weekend instead of visiting a local store every other day. It's an extremely hard habit to break off.
That's only true if the engineers following the order clearly know what they're doing is wrong, which is often not the case. Most software engineers are as ignorant about privacy as their customers. They do not give a damn about FOSS nor privacy and are often users of these products themselves.
Implying you should have the courage to fight for what you believe is right but not hold onto them once you're proven wrong.
I learned this as a company culture thing from one of my previous employers and not sure if there's another source for it. I did not like that employer very much in the end but this quote has been stuck with me since and I live by it.
I went through their privacy agreement and personally speaking, I'm not too comfortable with them when Location and Device data is part of their data collection, as these doesn't seem to be necessary for them to provide the service.
There are also a couple of other clauses that I find concerning with their data sharing agreement:
With third parties who may access data about you to provide you with the Services;
In Connection with, or during the negotiation of, any merger, sale of company stock or assets, financing, acquisition, divestiture or dissolution of all or a portion of our business;
My problem with the first clause is that it's too vague. From my interpretation, they can potentially sell your data to any third part as long as they can make the argument such data is necessary to provide you with the "Services"
The problem with second one is in the case of this company getting bought out. Even if we trust that they are currently a privacy respecting and trustworthy entity, there is no guarantee that in the case of a future buyout the buyer is equally trustworthy (e.g. what if Intuit buys them?). With the amount of data that they know about you (e.g. spending behaviour, device / location info, government IDs etc.), this could be extremely detrimental to your data privacy in the long run.
Now whether this is the lesser evil vs giving your payment info to websites is a judgement everyone needs to make. I steered away from it because I think it consolidates too much of my online purchasing habit into one place, and it's a risk on top of all the info I already provide to my banks. I can definitely see merit if you're using one throwaway card with low credit limit on this service or using it to make purchases on websites that you don't frequent.
Not at all. RHEL is still the standard in my field of work and I'm not seeing that going away any time soon. So it makes sense for me to stay in the ecosystem for career development. If I see any evidence of future changes in Fedora that compromises privacy or security I might change my mind.
settinmoon @ settinmoon @lemmy.ml Posts 0Comments 60Joined 2 yr. ago
Because it works, has okay configurations out of the box, and I just don't really care enough about the points mentioned in this article to make the switch. I only use it for cases where I don't expect privacy like government websites. As soon as you open an account there they got all your info anyway.