So, as I’m reading this threat to learn some etiquette myself, I infer the ‘user’s not wanting their “local” page to include duplicates’ to mean that when posting to multiple communities, it would be a best practice to only pick one relevant community per server instance?

Like in this case, it was crossed to both: ‘worldnews@lemmy.world’ and ‘world@lemmy.world’

In order to avoid duplicates, only one of those should have been included?

Like community1@server1 community2@server2, etc? If there’s two relevant communities, just pick the best one?

This corporate cycle isn’t likely to change anytime soon right?

Top tier corps, boards, Cs, ultimately care about share price and growth right?

Isn’t it tied to their pay incentives? To keep their contracts and incentives, they have to grow or reduce costs.

They make bad choices or bets among the way, no problem, just reduce costs and still meet the metrics. Only people who pay seem to be the workforce, right?

Or am I oversimplifying?

I think that’s synonymous with “all hail the shareholder”

What makes you believe one side’s propaganda over another? Both entities have incentive to illicit sympathy?

Removed by mod

I can’t imagine the pain and bottomless hatred I’d have if my son was killed in a war, but the name thing keeps me from wanting him to travel anywhere that might be a war zone.

Well, anymore than random places in the US already is…

Generically, sure. Seems like some highly complex social issues, religion, and hate might have complicated things…

Hey, the navy needs to keep their button pushing skills sharp /s

Lol🤔

The analogy of the fire department was a good one. Also a very good point about door locks.

I have similar thoughts about the electronic security alarm in my house when I hear the rare security vendor employee insider threat that broke into someone’s house by turning off the alarm. I still have one though. Like you said, I just chose to mostly trust them based on the hope they’ll internally police themselves out of their self interests to keep a good reputation and make money.

I do wish legislation could force vendors to be very transparent with their privileged access instead of the consumer or user just assuming it. Like a surgeon generals warning, “we made this, so we can unlock it. We are also forced by law to tell you when we’ve done it”. This of course is unrealistic from a national security or investigation standpoint.

Also good points about trust. We have to trust an enormous amount of institutions like banks, public service agencies, etc. Americans are having trust issues with law enforcement as a result of too many issues or abuse.

I wonder how many people care more about the secrets in their phone than their bank account?

I also don’t live in a country where I can reasonably expect the government to spy on me and take my freedom just for criticism, so I guess the stakes aren’t as high. The airdrop cracking in China comes to mind. Plenty of countries are being accused of using spyware against journalists and opponents.

Ha, yeah I wish a more concrete link could be made between the stance society has taken with smoking and apply it to visual/auditory pollution.

People are allowed to smoke as long as it’s not being forced upon other people (based on they both have equal rights). What about a right not to be bombarded with garbage every minute while you’re in public? I can’t see this going my way…

I setup our transparent proxy so we can do interception and IPS. I’m interested/concerned about the ability to use an intermediate ca cert downstream inline somewhere (like a teoco) and if regular consumer desktops would alert on that since their browser would trust the root. We GPO place our intermediate cert in the Windows trusted intermediates. I can’t remember if browsing breaks without doing that.

Not really a concern if there’s other certs/TLS required.in addition to the QWACs cert thought.

I got the impression the easier threat/worry was compromise of a nation CA and issuing illicit duplicate site certs, to then spoof a bank site. Still requires traffic redirection with DNS or routing though I think.

Another thought I had was regarding interception. Anyone with access to root cert can decrypt the data. My understanding was that these certs were supposed to be counter signing right?

Otherwise, wouldnt any government implementing this just be conducting zero effort surveillance?

Did you Google this, or is this your profession?

In many discussions I’ve seen, small or independent creators are one of the focuses of loss and protection.

Also there’s the acknowledgement that existing jobs will be reduced, eliminated, or transformed.

How much different is this from the mass elimination of the 50s stereotype secretaries? We used to have rooms full of workers typing memos, then we got computers, copiers, etc.

I know there’s a difference between a creator’s work vs a job/task. I’m more curious if these same conversations came up when the office technological advances put those people out? You could find a ton more examples where advancement or efficiency gains reduced employment.

Should technology advancement be tied to not eliminating jobs or taking away from people’s claim to work?

I know there’s more complexity like greed and profits here.

Agreed. I hate ads passionately. Ive been able to eliminate every source of ads from inside my house except websites, but I immediately back any site that won’t do simple or reading view.

Every moment of my attention taken by some stupid billboard or hearing tvs at a gas station I had to stop at is a moment I could have been thinking about something better. Or nothing, which sometimes would be nice.

airdropping dick pics in the subway

😆 Imagine the analog version of this… Dudes leaving random dick polaroids…

I think everyone is forgetting that there’s TLS on almost every website. You can monitor where people go, but you can’t see the traffic unless you get the person to install a malicious certificate in their device.

You can however have your traffic redirected to a lookalike site where you give up your account info. So there’s still some actual risk.

All stories like this are super frustrating to hear.

I’ve heard some stories where a person was targeted because of their social media handle being desirable. The anonymity part works both ways for both parties, sometimes, but I feel like it helps criminals more often than regular people.

That is super interesting. Not getting into the politics, Security Now podcast recently discussed two US child protection online related initiatives.

From a technical perspective, I imagine it being difficult to both handle age proof, guardian proofing, and dealing with lack of anonymity. Part of why I posed the question.