BrikoX

BrikoX , 5 months ago

Nobody. It’s a public forum, anyone can take what you said and use it as their own.

From technical side, instance admins, community moderators, and you have the ability to remove them.

BrikoX , 5 months ago

In very limited circumstances. While copyright applies automatically, it has to be registered with the Copyright Office for you to be able to enforce it. I doubt Lemmy posters register each of their posts with the Copyright Office.

BrikoX , 5 months ago

Following Libera Chat earlier post it’s not surprising. Matrix Foundation, been paying Element to handle all the infrastructure of even their main matrix.org instance. They have no team of their own.

BrikoX , 5 months ago (edited 5 months ago)

In theory, for profit Element (aka New Vector) and open governance Matrix Foundation should have different motivations. But since CEO and COO of Element are part of the Matrix Foundation and how all Matrix development is mainly done by Element it raises a lot of questions. Not to mention Element having ties and taking money from law enforcement agencies.

And just recently Foundation transferred two of the Matrix servers to Element which will require CLA to contribute.

BrikoX , 5 months ago

I don’t disagree that it is not a lost cause, the protocol is open, it’s just everything surrounding it is iffy. The Foundation finally got a Managing Director, we will see what that brings.

Personal ties are to some London based law enforcement agencies, I don’t recall specifically which ones anymore. As far as money, it’s whoever wants it. That part is not concerning on its own as they’re selling the service, not access, but the more worrying details you combine, the less trustworthy everything seems.

BrikoX , 5 months ago

There are, but Synapse is by far the most popular and if the transfer kills the momentum of outside development due to CLA, it will doom other implementations too.

BrikoX , 5 months ago

They miss some critical features like tracking series and since they only offer integration with Open Library most of your books will have to be added manually.

Once www.librarything.com fixes their API, it would be nice to see an integration with Openreads.

BrikoX , 5 months ago

It’s not, and it’s run by a private for-profit corporation, but once they re-enable their API it doesn’t really matter for the purpose of scraping the data. Open data is open data, and integration is just a hook, not part of the core functionality of the app.

BrikoX , 5 months ago

Same issue. Both rely purely on Open Library who have very limited database, so you pretty much have to enter all data manually. That’s not an issue if you have 10 or 50 books. But once you reach 1000s it’s not viable.

BrikoX , 5 months ago

They might be, but it has the same issue as Open Library, lack of books and missing details.

BrikoX OP , 6 months ago

12% is the max for Android OEMs, and they have to give a lot of concessions to Google to qualify.

As revealed in documents from Epic v. Google, Android’s “Premier Device Program” offers 12 percent search revenue to devices with “Google exclusivity and defaults for all key functions” and no rival app stores.

In raw numbers in might make sense for Google, but I can assure you, no Android OEM will see it like that in the next negotiations.

BrikoX OP , 6 months ago

You are using data from US only. Globally, Apple share fell to 16% in 2023 Q3, they are big, but far from the biggest player in global market.

BrikoX OP , 6 months ago

Again, US is the only western country with Apple being in the lead. In all other affluent western countries, Apple is 2nd or 3rd by market share. Just recently, they even fell to 2nd place in Western Europe, which everyone said was impossible just a few years back.

BrikoX OP , 6 months ago

They get a few % from app sales and ads if they quality for the highest tier, but most OEMs don’t.

BrikoX OP , 6 months ago

Google and killed projects.

BrikoX OP , 6 months ago

It’s not a direct democracy, but elected democracy is still democracy.

BrikoX OP , 6 months ago

More likely they were forced to change course due to public lobbying allegations and “expert” list comprised of big tech and cops being exposed.

BrikoX OP , 6 months ago

The new law would have required breaking end-to-end encryption (E2EE) as the companies would be required to scan messages. CSAM is just the pretext they use to compromise all communication. Same as “think of the children” is used to steal other rights.

BrikoX OP , 6 months ago

That’s the goal of end-to-end encryption. To make it impossible to scan. With E2EE company doesn’t have the decryption key, so there is no legible content to scan.

P.S. It’s still possible to collect metadata like when or who the message was sent, which is why services like WhatsApp which have E2EE are not recommended, but the content is safe.

the fact that it is mostly noticable on E2EE apps is only a side-effect of blanket surveilance, and not the main issue with the proposition.

Isn’t it though? We moved past the non encryption communication being safe a long time ago. And just because they will phase the old law, it doesn’t remove the ability of companies to still scan the messages or cops to request that data from those companies. Those companies still have access to the server and your encryption key where your messages are stored. E2EE on the other hand makes it technically impossible even if they want to do that or court orders them to do that.

Facebook says they plan to roll out full E2EE by 2024.

BrikoX OP , 6 months ago

That’s where infosec people are these days.

BrikoX , 6 months ago (edited 6 months ago)

Most private general trackers have various software from reputable uploaders. I would avoid most public sources unless you know the upload is from 1st party uploader and not re-upload.

BrikoX , 6 months ago

Yes. And by general I mean they don’t specialize in a particular category of content, but allow everything.

BrikoX OP , 6 months ago

One key part you missed was that she got used phone, so the IMEI is not tied to her identity. It’s far from perfect execution, but for the stated goal of not being able to be identified by the phone number, it’s adequate.

BrikoX , 7 months ago

killedbygoogle.com

BrikoX , 7 months ago

Curious that they didn’t highlight hCaptcha support they added which they said was “emergency” response…

BrikoX , 7 months ago

Signal messenger offers an ability to share location in real time. gearrice.com/…/how-to-share-your-location-in-real…

There is also TICE.

If you prefer to have control instead of sharing the location, built-in parental controls on Android or iOS should cover most use cases.

BrikoX , 7 months ago

NextDNS is great.

BrikoX , 8 months ago (edited 8 months ago)

DMA will only affect Whatsapp and Facebook Messenger from messengers, Apple’s iMessage manage to be excuded as they don’t have 45 million active users (10% of EU population).
https://lemmy.zip/pictrs/image/ab6494cf-957c-4ce3-9a8e-2c130423e7bd.webp

Edit: I said Google Messenger when I meant Facebook.

Signal fits all of your criteria.

• Has E2EE by default
• Has most generic UI possbile that just works
• Has a bunch of users
• Has clients for Android, iOS, Windows, macOS, Linux
• Has flashy features like stickers and stories
• Run by a non profit foundation instead of a single developer or for profit corporation

BrikoX , 8 months ago (edited 8 months ago)

Brave Search fully using their own index since April 27, 2023. But they refuse to identify their crawler and rely on googlebot if sites want to be excluded. Also their search API monetization of possible copyrighted content while understandable is a bit doubious due to their public stance on transparency.

StartPage also blocks VPN usage.

DuckDuckGo by their own admission now re-rank “trusted” sites to the top when it comes to what they clasify as"misinformation" so calling their “censorship” mild is huge understatement.

BrikoX , 8 months ago

They don’t pretent to be googlebot, they use their own crawler they just don’t share the name they use for it, so sites can’t exclude it with robots.txt. They just scrape the same sites that googlebot does, so if the site is excluded by googlebot they also skip it.

BrikoX , 8 months ago

I think it’s the first law that companies will take seriously as it has % penalty instead of traditional “part of doing business” fine.

BrikoX , 8 months ago

It’s a lot worse at the moment. Doesn’t combine results from multiple sites, doesn’t support Google results and lacks support for any configuration. It’s also manages to not have a button to go home after a search.

BrikoX , 8 months ago

While it is a nice idea, as it currently stands it is pointless. You need to define each of the nefarious purpose listed or it will fall under individual jurisdictions and judge interpretations.

Also don’t even bother submitting to OSI as it will be rejected based on their OSD.

BrikoX , 8 months ago

Signal. Works both on mobile and linked to desktop.

It should also work on Element Web, but not desktop clients.

BrikoX , 8 months ago

I mean they were never against it in this case. They asked to make a specific change and instead of doing that the author just closed the PR and then proceded to say how it will never get merged…

BrikoX , 8 months ago

There was at least one fork attempt, that died in 24 hours.

BrikoX , 8 months ago (edited 8 months ago)

No.

Software Licensing
We are licensing (free; non-commercial use) the HomeOS prototype to encourage teaching, research, and prototyping on connected >homes and devices. Thanks to Sigma Designs(opens in new tab), we also provide an SDK for Z-Wave devices.

Many research groups have licensed our prototype, including those at the Georgia Institute of Technology the University of Arkansas, >the University of Michigan, the University of Washington, the University of Wisconsin, and the University of Waterloo.

Go to [labofthings.codeplex.com/(opens](http://labofthings.codeplex.com/(opens) in new tab) for the code and documentation.

Source: microsoft.com/…/homeos-enabling-smarter-homes-for…

Edit:

More spefifically it’s lincensed under MSR-LA.

The source code uploaded by Microsoft Research to this repository is under LAB OF THINGS LICENSE AGREEMENT (MSR-LA), please see the License section to know the terms.

web.archive.org/web/…/labofthings.codeplex.com/

BrikoX , 8 months ago

Ask your client developer to implement cross-post support.

BrikoX , 8 months ago (edited 8 months ago)

You are correct. I’m sorry, I confused it with BSD-4 as that used to be the 3rd clause. I updated my post and thank you for calling me out.

BrikoX , 8 months ago

That’s where I disagree. While it’s true that the only difference is the GPL complience it’s definetely against the spirit of open source and OSD. So it is source available license, but calling it open source is a stretch. The simple fact that it renders it unsable for GPL projects go against what open source stands for.