- 0 Posts
- 5 Comments
291·23 days agodeleted by creator
deleted by creator
8·1 month agoI hope the study specifically publishes the data on the Model 3. I bought one before I became much more privacy conscious, but I’ve done my best to mitigate the leakage from that. In doing so, I read through all of Tesla’s terms and conditions upon opt out and sending any of my information or information that can be used to identify or profile me, should never be sold to advertisers. I write software licenses for a living so I’m pretty confident in my reading on this. It would be interesting to see what can currently be mitigated by changing some settings and what cannot.
I wouldn’t say it is too far out of date, having just gone through all of it in the past few months. That said, Bazzell does provide a lot of smaller updates in his Unredacted magazine articles. I believe he said he is no longer planning to update the book because he couldn’t afford to take the time since the book was being torrented a bit too much (I might be misrembering). Either way, his magazine is really good too. I became a big fan of his after that first book.
For anyone unfamiliar, I strongly recommend Michael Bazzell’s book Extreme Privacy for a fantastic entry into this world. It covers much more than your typical OPSEC stuff, but it is thorough, well written, and fun to learn about.
I just realized that the guy selling all of these surveillance cameras has the same name as the CIA headquarters. The writers of this reality are too damn lazy.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
43·5 months agodeleted by creator
My article was about how copyright law actually supports projects like PhotoCraft and ArtCraft (the software that reverse engineered Photoshop and other adobe products) and REA because, under current law (which is a long case review), clean rooming is okay. It goes back to the Compaq case and a few others. It relies on the idea that copyright protects expression, not function, and if you put a team of lawyers in a room with software and they purely describe the function of the software, and they hand that document to a team of engineers, that is fine under copyright law because it breaks the chain of expression. There’s much more detail, but my argument is that AI clean rooming projects are good for consumers in this regard, but that software patents for would be used more expansively in the coming years to counter those products. And so on and so forth. There are like eight more steps and guesses after that, but that was the gist.
As a personal thing, I agree with your conclusions for the most part. I just think there’s a lot more to consider in getting there. The road is much more complex than most people give it credit for.