• 73 Posts
  • 334 Comments
Joined 5 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 26th, 2020

help-circle







  • Jezu, co za papka słowna.

    Mnóstwo społeczności na masto jest ostro w opozycji do wszelkich libertariańskich pomysłów. Te społeczności mogą istnieć i się samozarządzać właśnie dlatego, że są niewielkimi społecznościami mającymi kontrolę nad swoim “ogródkiem”. Mogą ustanawiać własne reguły, samodzielnie podejmować decyzje co do blokowania i moderacji i tak dalej.

    Ten system, co sobie mamy wyobrazić, to dyktat większości. Biała, cis-heteronomratywna większość mogłaby narzucać administratorkom instancji queerowych, że mają się na przykład federować z jakimiś TERFoprzyjaznymi instancjami. Albo osobom administrującym instancje bezpieczne dla osób o ciemniejszym odcieniu skóry, że mają się federować z instancjami nie mającymi problemu z rasizmem.

    Nawet nie klikam tego linka. Kompletna bzdura.






  • rysiek@szmer.infotomemesy@szmer.infoNie teraz kochanie
    link
    fedilink
    Polski
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Fajny tekst, ale raczej dla Amerykanów, żeby się mobilizowali.

    No zdecydowanie to jest tekst o USA i dla USA.

    Tyle że oni nie mają tej subtelności co Irlandczycy, to się tam skończy krwawą wojną.

    Taka sytuacja. Mało widzę szans na uniknięcie tego.

    Plus historię autor przestudiował, ale wybiórczo. Nawet bez zagłębiania się można przecież podać przykład Polski: “faszyści” mieli już pełnię władzy, większość sejmową i prezydenta.

    Ale autor nie pisze o “faszystach” tylko o faszystach. PiS, przy całym swoim zamordyzmie i autorytaryzmie, to jednak nie jest Konfederacja. Nie chodzi mi o wybielanie PiSu ofkors, ale jednak jest zasadnicza różnica między tymi dwiema formacjami.

    Aktualnie przyszłość jest otwarta i jest większe prawdopodobieństwo że koalicję z faszystami zgotuje nam strona liberalna niż konserwatywna.

    Czyli zgadzamy się, że jest różnica między PiSem (“strona konserwatywna”, jak rozumiem) a Konfederacją (“faszystami”). Innymi słowy, jeszcze u nas faszyści do władzy się nie dorwali. Autorytarna konserwa tak, ale nie faszyści czystej wody.

    A druga rzecz, że ta przyszłość jest faktycznie otwarta, co też oznacza, że nie możemy odtrąbić sukcesu i powiedzieć “no to żeśmy faszystów usiekli”. Kolejny powód, dla którego autor mógł nie wziąć przykładu Polski pod uwagę w swoim przeglądzie historycznym.



  • Ech. https://pivot-to-ai.com/2025/08/02/protons-lumo-ai-chatbot-not-end-to-end-encrypted-not-open-source/

    Proton says your chats are stored with the same zero-access encryption as your email. That’s great! But their wording is: “end-to-end encryption in your chat history.”

    What are the ends in this scenario? And why not just say “end-to-end encryption in your chat”? Well, obviously, because they can’t say that.

    If you’re using a remote chatbot like Lumo, the chat has to exist as plain text for the chatbot to see it, for some unspecified length of time. Same if you dump files into the chatbot from your end-to-end-encryptoed Proton Drive — their version of Google Drive.

    That’s how most web services work, and it might not sound like a big deal — but Proton’s email famously does not work like that. There is never plain text at rest. So Proton is trying to handwave on their past reputation and say, well, parts of it are totally secure. Just not the rest.

    Proton also used to publish complete cryptographic threat models for its products. They didn’t for the AI email assistant and they haven’t for Lumo. It’s a glaring absence.




  • rysiek@szmer.infoOPtoTechnology@beehaw.orgThe Hype is the Product
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 months ago

    Hi, author here. Thanks for the good word.

    Yes, Welch popularized the model of shareholder primacy, I should perhaps link to that in the text.

    But the point I am making goes further: it’s not just shareholder primacy, because that could still be compatible with just making a good product and service and focusing on that.

    What I am saying is: shareholder primacy has now lead to another, kinda new thing, which is basically making the hype the actual main product the company sells. And tech companies diving into that bubble in lockstep. Every large tech company today is selling AI to shareholders, regardless of what a regular person can buy from that company – graphics cards, office productivity suite, operating systems, or smartphones. The “regular” product or service is just a vehicle for AI hype, an empty vessel to be filled with whatever grabs investor attention.

    In other words: yes, shareholder primacy is a key underlying thing for it, but there was shareholder primacy without treating the hype itself as the product.






  • This is way more different thing than claiming and proving that Telegram is somehow FSB honeypot.

    I did not claim nor attempt to prove that “Telegram is somehow FSB honeypot”. I did claim and I believe I showed that it is indistinguishable from an FSB honeypot. If you’re nit-picking, at least nit-pick the correct claims, instead of some straw-man version of what I wrote that happens to be easier to attack. 😼

    Yes, OCCRP received funding from USAID. They put that information very clearly on their own website. Here’s a crazy thought: investigative journalism needs to be funded somehow, and USAID was one of the ways this could be done. If you have a better idea of how to fund investigative journalism, there is a lot of media outlets that would love to hear from you!

    The way OCCRP was/is funded does not say anything about the veracity of their reporting. Or that of IStories, which was done independently of OCCRP (that’s an important bit that most people miss).

    What does speak to the veracity of reporting is the fact that over a decade and a half of reporting on stuff like this OCCRP has been sued by oligarchs multiple times in the most oligarch-friendly jurisdiction out there, UK (specifically, London), and have not lost a single time. Will Telegram sue OCCRP or IStories? Perhaps. Will they win? I seriously doubt it.

    If they do sue, the discovery will be hilarious. IStories folks are going to get access to all sorts of great documents, I’m sure. Can’t wait for these to get published!

    Speaking of documents, I like how you quote two random claims made in that OCCRP version of IStories article, and just decide to ignore the bit where Vedeneev claims, in actual court documents, that yes he has access to Telegram infrastructure. And how there are documents showing he owns GNM. And how there are documents showing he also signed documents on behalf of Telegram (hilariously, a document exists that he signed both on behalf of GNM and of Telegram). And how he co-owns or co-owned companies which are also co-owned by people directly connected to the FSB. And a bunch of other stuff.

    But that doesn’t fit your “US shill” hot take, so why mention any of that right? 😄

    You might also want to read the Russian version of IStories story, for hard documentary evidence of Durov’s connections to FSB:
    https://www.istories.media/stories/2025/06/10/kak-telegram-svyazan-s-fsb/

    On a personal note, it is so much joy to see all the hand-wavy pushback in this thread. Clearly the story hit a pain point somewhere. The funny thing is that if similar but much less substantiated claims were made about Signal here, there would be a frenzy of dunking on it as an “imperialist tool of surveillance”. 🤡