• 0 Posts
  • 49 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: August 19th, 2023

help-circle
  • Got it. Cool.

    When I saw this originally I was already coming down from someone else in my circles saying probably exactly what you had in the meme, but without the critical thinking part. Like a kind of “she never said she had great genes, she said her eyes were blue! Suck it liberal! Facts>feelings!” Your commentary makes sense, but the meme was exactly, like I am pretty sure close to verbatim what they had said in defense of the ad. So in seeing the meme I was ready for war.










  • Signal is not a suitable venue for hosting national security discussions. It’s all laid out in the article that it goes beyond encryption.

    Information about an active operation would presumably fit the law’s definition of “national defense” information. The Signal app is not approved by the government for sharing classified information. The government has its own systems for that purpose. If officials want to discuss military activity, they should go into a specially designed space known as a sensitive compartmented information facility, or SCIF—most Cabinet-level national-security officials have one installed in their home—or communicate only on approved government equipment, the lawyers said. Normally, cellphones are not permitted inside a SCIF, which suggests that as these officials were sharing information about an active military operation, they could have been moving around in public. Had they lost their phones, or had they been stolen, the potential risk to national security would have been severe.

    The tldr is that the endpoint is insecure. These discussions should not be done on a mobile device, it should not be possible to participate in or view the contents of the discussion out in the open, and it should not even be possible to accidentally invite 3rd parties that were not cleared.

    This article goes further in displaying that participants are not adhering to data retention standards, either, to no surprise.

    It’s a fascinating article, and really is a revealing example of how profoundly inept this regime truly is.




  • And i wonder what happened in 2024 that drove people away from that service. For me, what I think of, is that time they refused to take responsibility for someone that died as a result of lies and negligence at a restaurant on their property, referred to an arbitration clause buried in the terms of service in an unrelated product only agreed to as part of a long-expired product trial.

    All of that would have convinced me to cancel service.

    Also, interesting timing, just this morning I received an email from Disney doubling down on arbitration, while also announcing an increase in ad presence for their “ad free” service tiers. I have never been subscribed to Disney+, though, and I can be sure I never will with that trajectory. I’m glad they can remind me constantly to never agree to use their services.






  • They don’t. Nearly everything that you buy has a unique serial number, and if consumers are buying direct from manufacturers it could, in theory, link a consumer to a serial number. It’s unlikely that they could make those connections, though. Peak sells direct, but they also sell through 3rd party stores and distributors, where there is an abstraction between the serials and consumers.


  • Yo, that’s still a violation of CANSPAM, and you might as well report them while we still have an FTC/FCC. After the new admin takes office… well… but theres still a month left before then.

    If their communication contains anything transactional it’s a violation. Notifying unsubscribed users of a TOS change? Legal. That communication mentions anything about products or promotions? No longer legal.