BluescreenOfDeath

joined 3 months ago

Never ask a company to pick between the right thing and profit.

It's fundamentally impossible for a publicly traded company not to choose profit over 'The Right Thing', fullstop. Shareholders feel that have a fundamental right to growth, and if Google's CEO were to choose 'The Right Thing' over profit, the shareholders can oust them in favor of a CEO willing to choose profits.

Enshittification is where every public company ends up, because the line MUST go up, no other alternative is acceptable.

[–] BluescreenOfDeath@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

If you win the house and Senate with a majority then, you remove those that are extremely corrupt.

Democrats would need a supermajority in the Senate to achieve that. Anything less than 2/3rds and nobody gets removed.

[–] BluescreenOfDeath@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Does this mean deep water planets? Or will they still be basically a shallow planet wide lake?

[–] BluescreenOfDeath@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

I can't help but see it as the foot in the door.

I understand that Mozilla needs money, but I can't make everyone who uses Firefox commit to donating money to keep them from having to do things like this to stay afloat. But them going down this path makes me not want to donate at all.

[–] BluescreenOfDeath@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

I never said I was, just that I wanted to support the browser that respects my privacy, and this move is making me reconsider it.

As long as it's open source someone will be able to find a way to turn it off, either by an addon or by patching and compiling the source code.

[–] BluescreenOfDeath@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago (4 children)

IMO, that's splitting a hair.

For a browser that supposedly respects user privacy, the fact that this is opt-out rather than opt-in really leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

I'm going to reconsider my monthly recurring donation to Mozilla, especially if they keep this up.

[–] BluescreenOfDeath@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Even if law enforcement can get a warrant, unless there's a backdoor in the encryption then the data stays private. That's the whole point of encryption.

The fundamental problem is law enforcement feeling entitled to snoop on private communications with a warrant vs the inherent security flaw with making a backdoor in encrypted communications. The backdoor will eventually get exploited, either by reverse engineering/tinkering or someone leaking keys, and then encryption becomes useless. The only way encryption works is if the data can only be decrypted by one key.

Anyone else remember when TSA published a picture of the master key set for TSA approved luggage locks and people had modeled and printed replicas within hours?

[–] BluescreenOfDeath@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

The power to make laws, like codifying Roe vs Wade, lies with congress.

I'm peeved about the SC ruling too, but they didn't unilaterally hand over all governmental power to the executive.

[–] BluescreenOfDeath@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Because the president had unilateral authority to make laws, right?

Nevermind Mitch McConnell standing up in the senate and saying they'd refuse to cooperate with Obama, it's Obama's fault.

[–] BluescreenOfDeath@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

In a system rigged to support one party over another.

[–] BluescreenOfDeath@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I guess I should point out I live and work in coastal Georgia.

So I dunno why I have such a different experience. I'm on my phone a lot calling people and using GPS with no overheating issues unless it's in direct sunlight for too long.

view more: next ›