MajesticFlame

joined 1 year ago
[–] MajesticFlame@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I would challenge "very secure" but it is more than secure enough for this usecase.

[–] MajesticFlame@lemmy.one 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

On one hand, I do want to ask why Frebch people love setting France on fire so much. On the other hand, when shit like this passes as laws, I wonder why we are not setting our countries on fire...

[–] MajesticFlame@lemmy.one 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

They should also need it in the US. The issue is, that if the tool is in the hands of the cops, there is no way to check who they spied on (and therefore if they had warrant).

At least if it was executed by a comercial entity, they can check the warrants and be liable if they do it without one. But that is very likely not how it will be implemented. The cops will get the tools to do with as they please.

As an example, one state in the US (forgot which one) put in a law that requires the police to submit every data search warrant into a public database so that they could be audited by the public. After they compared the contents of the database to number of requests in companies transparency reports, it turned out there were over 5 times as many requests in the state then what was reported in the database, despite reporting being required by law.

[–] MajesticFlame@lemmy.one 48 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

Sure, the issue is that, with no transparency, cops will use it even if they are just courios what they friends are doing. This is already known to happen in the US, where cops used it to stalk their SOs or even in extreme cases women they were starting to date.

If they already have the technology in their hands, there is no way to stop them.

[–] MajesticFlame@lemmy.one 5 points 1 year ago

I do. GOS club!

[–] MajesticFlame@lemmy.one 91 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (12 children)

Quite possibly not. Remember that the admins running lemmy instances have very limited revenue so paying for servers is an issue. Some instances even encourage posting links instead of images to save on cost.

Videos are in a league of their own when it comes to size and therefore the server power needed. Lemmy probably can't afford it. Its the prive we pay for no ads. You have to link videos.

[–] MajesticFlame@lemmy.one 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I just wanted to say, those are rookie numbers.

[–] MajesticFlame@lemmy.one 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

revanced manager can just patch a different API key into the app. No need to rename it.

[–] MajesticFlame@lemmy.one 18 points 1 year ago

Still borderline illegal that they don't allow you to delete comments from private subredits...

[–] MajesticFlame@lemmy.one 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I don't know if CCPA specifically limits itself to residents. Generally laws like this apply to any business conducted in California, unless they limit it in the law itself. This means either the user or the company is in California. Reddit is in California.

Of course there is also the GDPR in EU so I am going to try it now.

view more: ‹ prev next ›