tiktok age-protects cock jokes unless u send ur drivers license/passport to prove ur over 21. kill everyone now
this is what their support sent me. doesnt help every social media is copying tiktok atm the future of the web looks so grim rn. interent anonymity is in critical condition
I feel like signs like this of where the web is going are the number one sign to delete accounts on sites like TikTok and start using places that prioritize privacy even if their methods are imperfect. Any nugget of privacy you can get is crucial now.
Install duckduckgo and decentraleyes, use signal or element instead of discord for sensitive discussions, try not to post your face or name at all, and if you do don’t do so extensively.
Make a DRM free music repository and for the love of God install an adblocker, hell if you have the free time make your own website and rss feed!
Make the web work for you instead of being a passive product. If a forum or site asked for like my id or passport to prove I was able to register or access parts of it a few years back I would think it’s identity theft, and now it’s just something that people view as fuckin everyday shit. Christ!!!
And uninstall TikTok! Uninstall Facebook Instagram any shit unless u know what you’re getting into and put up several layers to stop tracking. Like. God. Dystopic shit here.
#EFF30 Fireside Chat: Surveillance, with Edward Snowden
Join @efforg in a candid live multi-platform discussion of digital #privacy and surveillance with special guest @Snowden
TODAY! Wednesday, May 5, 2021 12 pm PT
“To commemorate the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s 30th anniversary, we present #EFF30 Fireside Chats. This limited series of livestreamed conversations looks back at some of the biggest issues in Internet history and their effects on the modern web. ”
The argument Pinto makes is that the story and the doll normalize 24-hour surveillance in the mind of a child, which makes them susceptible to more passively accept police-state surveillance as adults.
“I don’t think the elf is a conspiracy and I realize we’re talking about a toy,” Pinto told The Post. “It sounds humorous, but we argue that if a kid is okay with this bureaucratic elf spying on them in their home, it normalizes the idea of surveillance and in the future restrictions on our privacy might be more easily accepted.”
It’s based in a theory that was developed by Jeremy Bentham and popularized by Michel Foucault in which students, prisoners, factory workers and others were thought to function better (for whatever value of better) in a system called a panopticon, in which an individual is potentially under surveillance 24-hours a day, but never actually KNOWS whether or not he or she is being surveilled.
Pinto said she’s not the first person to be troubled by Elf on the Shelf’s surveilling. She’s said parents routinely contact her to say they changed the rules of the game after it made their families uneasy. And many kids, she said, often intuitively feel like spying and being a tattletale is wrong.
“A mom e-mailed me and told me that the first day they read the elf book and put the elf out, her daughter woke up crying because she was being watched by the elf,” Pinto recounted. “They changed the game so it wouldn’t scare the child.”
In addition to the problem of normalizing surveillance in the mind of a child, this also forces the child into a situation where they never feel like they are free to simply be themselves; they are forced to be “on their best behavior” at all times, unable to relax and make mistakes and do the job of growing up and being a child, because they never know if the elf is spying on them, ready and waiting to report back to Santa Claus that they’ve been bad.
My co-worker got Elf on the Shelf for her four-year-old daughter last year, and was so freaked out by her daughter’s sudden and complete change in behaviour (uncharacteristically worried and anxious, while trying to be on her ‘best’ behaviour that she never kept up for family or at school) that she stuffed Elf in the garbage after a week, telling the daughter that the Elf had to go back to the North Pole to help Santa with Christmas.
Also read the paper linked above, it’s a good one.
I hate this entire concept so much.
the creators of this monstrosity are exactly what you would expect
Remember when they caught the Golden State Killer
by comparing DNA crime-scene evidence to big commercial genomic
databases (like those maintained by Ancestry.com, 23 and Me, etc) to
find his family members and then track him down?
It’s not just him.
If you’re an American of European descent, there’s a 60% chance that you
can be identified from genomic database searches, because even if
you’ve never signed up for one of these junk science services, your stupid cousins have.
They also predict that in the “near future,” “nearly any US individual
of European descent” will be identifiable from commercial genomic
databases.
The researchers propose a mitigation technique for avoiding
nonconsensual genetic profiling: “DTC providers should cryptographically
sign the text file containing the raw data available to customers (fig.
S6). Third-party services will be able to authenticate that a raw
genotyping file was created by a valid DTC provider and not further
modified. If adopted, our approach has the potential to prevent the
exploitation of long-range familial searches to identify research
subjects from genomic data. Moreover, it will complicate the
ability to conduct unilaterally long-range familial searches from DNA
evidence.
There was another consultation but as has happened with every public consultation conducted by the Justin Trudeau Government, they just do what they want regardless.
There was another consultation but as has happened with every public consultation conducted by the Justin Trudeau Government, they just do what they want regardless.
In spite of armies of editors and proof readers, main stream publishing has a long history of published typos. And as a writer I can tell you. it’s really easy to miss something, especially in something as substantial as an article or a book. Even if you know how to spell.
Even when a mistakes were caught, it wasn’t reasonable to assume publishers would recall books and reissue them with…
In spite of armies of editors and proof readers, main stream publishing has a long history of published typos. And as a writer I can tell you, it’s really easy to miss something, especially in something as substantial as an article or a book. Even if you know how to spell.
Even when a mistakes were caught, it wasn’t reasonable to assume publishers would recall books and reissue them with corrections. Errors wouldn’t be fixed until the second edition. If there was a second edition.
One of the most earth shattering things to happen to the world of proof readers was our move into the digital age with the invention of the spell checker. Suddenly proof readers became obsolete.
But all spell checkers are not equal. When the typo is a real word, no spell checker is going to flag it. The thing we often forget about technology is that it is no more perfect than any other tool; human supervision is still required.
Wikipedia is the poster child for self publishing. Not only does it rely on the good will of the public to add articles and factual information, if errors are made, Wikipedia is self-correcting: the public has the power to correct errors and ommissions, whether of fact or spelling.
All those mainstream publishers who no longer employ enough staff to adequately proof read their content are publishing online in digital formats. Instead of hiring proofreaders, they often have a “report typo” option on their webspage so readers can catch their mistakes for them. Just as CBC does.
This way, when a reader gets hit between the eyes by an annoying typo, we can report it, so others won’t have to suffer as we have.
So I clicked on the link— it should be easy, right? But it seems CBC isn’t as interested in being told about typos as it is interested in getting personal information about anyone who wants to correct a typo.
This isn’t a news issue, or even a matter of opinion. If I point out the author probably didn’t mean the word “pit,” it doesn’t matter who I am or where I live. I could be living in Iceland and it would still be a typo. Either I’m right or I’m wrong.
Something that ought to take a minute and cost me nothing but a bit of time I was willing to spend, ended up costing me privacy.
There is no need for it, but this has become a prevalent practice online. Our personal information has become a valuable commodity that companies want for themselves, and very often to sell.
If you’ve ever wondered why you get spam, this is why. (I know someone who gave up an email account because he got so much spam.)
We need to stop giving our personal details to companies who have no legitimate need of them.
If you’re buying something that needs to be delivered, sure, you have to give your address. But if you’re making a donation to a political party and they want to be able to connect with you, they will need an address, a phone number, or an email address— but not all three. If you’re leaving a comment or signing a petition, they want to make sure you’re a real person, not a bot.
Companies want it all; whether they need it or not. If you give it to them, when you tell them to stop phoning you, they can send you junkmail or spam. If CBC or any person or company tells you information they have no right to is “required” the correct answer is “none of your business.”
Privacy is an important part of personal security; don’t give up any more than you have to.
Image Credit: My “Big Brother” poster makes use of the excellent Justin Trudeau photo that A.k.fung dedicated to the public domain, which allows me to liberate the poster as well… you can legally share and share and share some more ~ not even attribution is required! https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:INC_2009_Justin_Trudeau.jpg
!["process that you pit in place" presumably should be "put" NOTE: Presumably you want to crowd source your proofreading. That means you seek help from people like me who are willing to take the time to notify you when CBC publishes an error. That's reasonable. What is NOT reasonable is that CBC *requires* people who are willing to HELP CBC (gratis) to turn over personal information. Name: [Required] Email address: [Required] City, Province and Country: [Required] In other words, we are not only doing work you really ought to be paying professional proof readers to do for free, and are required to pay for the privilege with our personal data. Which is why I'm not doing this again.](https://laurelrusswurm.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/required.png?w=700)
