I think the fear is that this turns into an “embrace, extend, extinguish”. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish

I don’t know if the fear is well rooted, but I can definitely understand how Facebook is perceived as not having established a history of trust.

They are a private company, which have placed profits above the best interests of its users.

Edit: I think you can draw a parallel with another scenario: an open and free market requires regulation. There should be rules and boundaries, such that a true free and open market exists. Similarly, there’s an argument to be made than we should restrict the fediverse for it to keep existing in the way we want it to.

It’s also heavily skewed in my case due to online hours being the only hours counted, while I use my steamdeck away from internet most of the time.

Fedora is still pretty frequently and recently up to date with respect to packages and kernel, not sure you’d be losing much over arch.

But the debate to me is also not that important, I’ve been running fedora and have at some few occasions gotten some instabilities due to updates (mostly Nvidia with Wayland) so I can totally understand someone wanting stability and reliability over bleeding edge).

It’s almost as if he was trying to hide from prying eyes… And get some… What was it again… Privacy?

Right. That’s the point. Let’s make that illegal. The same way you can’t sign a contract to give away any other rights.

Is this an exception? Having heard in France and in Germany how easily and often people get caught, this is the first time I hear of such a situation in Switzerland.

Is there any case in Switzerland where someone was caught and fined for having distributed copyrighted material?

This is not the case in language models. While computer vision models train over multiple epochs, sometimes in the hundreds or so (an epoch being one pass over all training samples), a language model is often trained on just one epoch, or in some instances up to 2-5 epochs. Seeing so many tokens so few times is quite impressive actually. Language models are great learners and some studies show that language models are in fact compression algorithms which are scaled to the extreme so in that regard it might not be that impressive after all.

More notably, what it also does not mean is “we will stop collecting it”…

Where do they claim that?

The article from Facebook I found about the subscriptions is this one: https://about.fb.com/news/2023/10/facebook-and-instagram-to-offer-subscription-for-no-ads-in-europe/

The only relevant thing I saw related to the topic was “while people are subscribed, their information will not be used for ads”. It does not say that information will stop being collected. Just that it will not be used for ads.

So by all interpretations, there is in fact no suggestion that they will stop tracking paid users.

I think there is a key distinction here: providing ads is fine, but tracking users and sending them targeted ads requires explicit consent. Forcing them to consent to giving up that privacy or else paying is not a fair choice. It’s not even financially fair either as meta is apparently making 80usd a year per user.

Why not give a choice to a user to get ads but not being tracked and not getting targeted advertisements? Where is that option?

When you pay meta, do they comit to stop tracking you or only stop showing you target ads? Because I certainly care about the tracking part and giving users the false sense of privacy because they pay is so disingenuous…

Are Meta even committing to stop tracking when users pay? Or are they simply not showing targeted ads but still totally tracking?

I have been able to search logged out within a repository, up to this year. I think what you are referring to is search across all repositories. That was indeed disables a while ago. But things did change this year, unfortunately. So yes there is a legitimate and new issue… Once more.

I think there is an importance nuance: it’s not that most people don’t care about privacy, it’s that they don’t realize that they in fact do.

If they ever get bitten in the ass caused by privacy issues, they are likely to share their outrage, justifiably. But yeah, most people don’t realize how important privacy is or what a lack of privacy actually implies…

To be fair, even in metric countries in Europe, they use imperial occasionally. This is the case for wheel sizes and display sizes, both usually measured in inches.

I’m glad to see it improving lately, together with proton, but it’s not ideal yet, for sure.

For people who want to follow the progress of anticheat on Linux: https://areweanticheatyet.com/

I don’t want to be cynical, but is this part required for Apple to implement RCS?

“and bring a wide range of iMessage-style features to messaging between iPhone and Android users.”

I can totally imagine it being limited to the encryption and the bare minimum, as imessages features don’t perfectly overlap with the RCS features (e.g. emojis).

Ownership of games is a pretty reasonable interpretation in this context. How can ownership of games exist in a context of digital access, activation, online requirements and no physical media?

I’m not sure you’re attempting good faith communication, but in the case you are, I think most people’s opinion is that there could be room for Google but people are just concerned about Google being the only option instead of one of many. That’s also my interpretation for GrapheneOS’s stance, they don’t intend on breaking compatibility with Google services but instead run them on your own terms, putting the user in control of how Google operates on their phone. Hence, I don’t see any contradiction in your two statements.

It is illegal in some countries to fully cover your face in public. If it became a way to bypass surveillance, it could be made into law if it wasn’t already :(

Edit: for those wondering, Switzerland is one of them. Though they don’t have a large number of public cameras (yet?).