Warthunder forum be like
this post was submitted on 29 Feb 2024
1344 points (96.9% liked)
Privacy
32412 readers
135 users here now
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don't promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Everytime someone says they don't have anything to hide I ask them what the pin of their phone is and to give me their phone. Suddenly that's something different...
There is a difference between having nothing to hide and not closing the door when talking a shit
load more comments
(3 replies)
I once asked a friend if he trusted the lock on his phone (brand new iPhone 15 Pro Max, latest and greatest). He told me he did. I asked him if I could use his phone while it was locked, and he told me "No, I don't trust you. You would probably hack it or something." That statement says two things:
-
He only cares about attacks on privacy on a personal level, which is the mental flaw lots of people have.
-
He doesn't actually trust the lock on his phone, but refuses to admit it.
By the way, here's a few fun gimmicks you can pull on iPhone users:
-
See if you can swipe left to view widgets on the lock screen. I was able to get someone's address this way. He told me the whole time "There's nothing you can find there." and then afterwards said "Ah, crap."
-
If there is a lock screen mini widget (under the time) for a clock or related feature, tap on it and it will open the clock app. You can also get there if you can swipe down to access control center if the "timer" button is enabled there. You can then make it look like you unlocked their phone, and start reading off their alarm names. This one has freaked out a lot of people.
-
If they realize how you got there and try disabling control center access on the lock screen (as they should, FaceID is fast enough people!), you can see if you can access Siri and say "View my alarms".
Me: graphene phone with notifications hidden until unlocked. No voice assistant whatsoever. I guess the only thing you can do is take pictures from lock screen but that's not really useful. It doesn't show gallery of previous photos.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
*grabs popcorn*
I mean...the state does have legitimate things to hide beyond their spying programs. Not every person that spills government secrets is as careful as Snowden.
A 'State' is not inherently bad. That's just libertarian propaganda/dogma. Self-interested psychopaths in charge of a state is bad..
Oh boy, here comes the political drama. Can we not do this?
Too late
Funny thing about ancap libertarianism is that they've correctly identified that power can lead to tyranny, but they're completely oblivious to the power that corporatism (the conclusion of lassez-faire capitalism) results in.
tHe mArKeT wIlL rEgUlAtE tHeM
They often are Christians, so they apply fundamentalist style thinking and cannot challenge the assumptions they made.
States always wind up being run by self-interested psychopaths.
That's not a "flaw;" it's the fundamental nature of the concept.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Lol lots of people think that no entity has the right to monopolize violence against a population.
The state is kinda bad and it's not only Right-Libertarians who say that. Even so, leaking documents is not always bad. Like, the Abu Ghraib leak was objectively good.
Abu Graib wasn't leaked. Amnesty International talked to prisoners that were released. Then the Red Cross used their oversight powers to get in and make an official report. Then a soldier reported the crimes to the Army's version of the FBI, (CID). The Army then did an investigation and started arresting people.
load more comments
(2 replies)
BUT BUT BUT THOSE ARE ILLEGAL TO SHARE
Does the uk not have a law against executions and if so would the not be breaking said law by extraditing him.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Regardless of any judicial or legal red tape preventing that extradition, are we seriously operating under the assumption that the United States government would execute him?
are we seriously operating under the assumption that the United States government would execute him?
Legally, UK and EU courts must consider this, because sending someone to a country where they will be executed for their crimes is a breach of human rights.
By the strict reading of the law, he could be extradited for life in prison. If he was being extradited to be sentenced to death, that would be a no go.
The US are skirting and pushing the bounds of UK law here. Unfortunately, they will likely get away with it, because the English are pussies.
load more comments
(1 replies)
the whole plan is to get him over here and then kill him or let him die of neglect.
Well, Epstein's cell is empty at the moment.
May as well get in early.
Julian Assange didn't kill himself.
The US hasn't executed someone under espionage charges since the Rosenbergs.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
I suspect they’d prefer that he die in prison over there, but if not then in prison over here. I don’t think they want to ever take this to trial, because it’s been a farce from the start.
They literally dropped all the potentially credible charges they were first going for. Those women in Sweden? Long gone, as of 5 years ago. Hillary Clinton's emails? Also dropped.
What really sucks is that the narrative has changed over years, as the facts have been forgotten. People think he's been in league with Russia, and some even think Russia provided him with evidence against Republicans alongside the Democrat emails, and that he refused to publish the Republican stuff in support of Russia so that Russia's man (Trump) could get in the White House.
First off, Russia wouldn't provide Republican emails if they were trying to get a Republican inside the White House (they didn't provide any such emails and they did promote Trump). Second, the controversy as about Wikileaks not publishing details of Russian corruption. While this is definitely controversial (and frankly something I disagree with), Wikileaks' reasoning was simply: "Russian corruption is not news, it is to be expected".
Those two women from Sweden were not prostitutes (and even if, it wouldn't matter) and have themselves backtracked from pressing charges. They are also victims of this entire farce and have been instrumentalized.
Fair point, I meant to change that before I posted. I think I was getting confused with Trump and the prostitutes that peed on him.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Man I really do enjoy reading the classifieds