Taiwan will sabotage infrastructure in such a scenario, but this line of analysis seems nonsensical. Incorporate Taiwan in to China and the world loses the ability to manufacture some chips that the West are reliant on which further solidifies China’s influence globally. Others will be forced to buy technology from China, even if it’s not as advanced as what Taiwan sold before. Who else is manufacturing these things? Not America.

China doesn’t need Taiwan. America needs Taiwan.

It somehow feels like everything is owned by a handful of companies… Oh, that company? It was its own thing in the 1980s, but X brought them out. X also brought Y, Z and C. There’s no competition. X owns everything.

Hey crypto-investor! I’m letting you know I’m about to print my own crypto from the open-source bitcoin! Buy my alt-coins now! Your profits are about to go to the moon! Buy CON-coin! The only difference between it and bitcoin is hype and branding! Get in before it’s too late! Computers go brrrrrr infinite ponzi-schemes.

It really hasn’t. It’s always been a commercial outfit and it’s been true to that goal: make money. Consumers keep making fantastical stories about a titan of surveillance-capitalism though. It was financed via the CIA and it has been working with the USA’s intelligence-community from day dot. It hasn’t changed. It’s still Google and it will continue being Google.

More like a phenomenon. Things come and go though. I don’t play games anymore; I don’t even know what’s popular.

Halo died a long time ago when I was still playing. Halo: Reach felt like the start of its decline.

But at what cost? U_U

But the Americans have the world’s largest prison-population; but the Americans built a country through slavery; but the Americans are bombing children; but the Americans are fighting amongst themselves and the American empire is in death throes; but the Americans are starting another war; but the Americans are backing a genocide; but the Americans are pedophiles. Jeez America, at what cost? But at what cost?

Wait… wait… you believe Facebook?

It’s standard operating practice to steal everything. The world’s full of dumb fucks.

“Has no money.”

You’ve given more away to Facebook. If Facebook hasn’t asked for photo ID it’s because its system is confidant it knows who you really are. Other people will be asked for photo ID when signing up for a Facebook account.

That’s not necessarily true. It’s ridiculously easy to find, especially in this example. Simply change your pickup address to the house next door.

Do you think that fools Uber into believing that the user using the same mobile-computer, the same account, the same data-connection and within the same travel patterns is now a completely different person?

No government is going to enforce a universal flat-rate. However that doesn’t prevent what I’m talking about. Uber can give everyone a different flat-rate. How would you know? You wouldn’t. That’s the problem. A friend gets charged a different flat-rate? Ok, now you know, but when the government goes to investigate Uber says, “well the flat-rate had to increase. It’s now XXX.” Again, the imbalance is enormous between the businesses that have the data and any external regulatory body that has to do footwork to get any data.

The same item sells for two different prices at separate stores? “Oh, that store just had a sale.”

The issue is that these are black boxes. No one but the authors of the system know what’s happening. Law prevents Uber from increasing the price on a nearly flat mobile-computer? They didn’t. That’s just the normal price. Who has all the data? Only Uber. No one else. How then can you enforce such laws?

Oh no a socialist ‘planned’ economy via computers. Argentina don’t you dare! … I’m sure glad we have capitalist ‘planned’ economies now. Their plan is to fuck you till you die. More surveillance please! Surveillance-capitalism demands it!

This isn’t a good article @ouch. It’s dull, meandering and conflates issues.

Both Apple and Google want your identity anchored to their operating systems.

That’s true regardless of passkeys and why is Microsoft excluded here?

Logging into accounts on devices you own is the ideal scenario for passkeys. When you have to handle a colleague’s computer, it gets much more inconvenient. You could plug in a hardware key, but you don’t always have access to the ports.

What sort of drivel is this? Is anyone reading the article? I doubt it. Sorry, I’m not logging into important accounts on a colleague’s computer, regardless of being unable to squat and plug in a usb-dongle. The last statement even concedes that passkeys are an improvement for 99% of the user-population. It’s an improvement for 100% of the user-population. Like usual this is just drivel generated from friction around ‘newness’. It’s different–which automatically becomes scary for some users. The writing is just not coherent and there’s zero critique on passkey’s design and technicalities, of which there are things to criticize.

Get a physical passkey and if you have more than 100 accounts you have a problem. Buy two and use one as a backup in case you lose your first. Keep it in a safe and if you forget your safe’s combination… well, I guess we should abolish safes too: terrible account recovery support there. Yikes!

Passkey’s themselves can be protected with a PIN–the software I’ve used does not limit it to numbers. It can be your ‘master password’ if you want. This is a technical complaint of mine as all software I’ve used reference it as a PIN (personal identification number), which means numbers only. Except other characters are allowed. I’m not sure what the official spec. states.

But children don’t have credit cards…

There’s blood on their hands. Either they keep the hype up or go to jail regardless of any of their statements being true or not.

America. Not even once. At what cost?

Thread about LG TVs conducting mass-surveillance on consumers just because they can: computers are dirt-cheap and consumers foot the bill: they pay for the malicious- & spyware-infested computers and they pay for the data connections that allow those malicious computers to exfiltrate data back.

User concerned about mass-surveillance.

Your post: that’s completely and technically impossible. I just highlighted how mass-surveillance of a national-population’s location is now child’s play because it’s fundamentally ‘metadata’ that’s generated by the network: it’s how computers work. The difficult part is computing on these large databases, something that technology companies have made great progress in.

Nearly everyone literally carries around an internet-enabled microphone in their pocket; surveillance-capitalists are trying to hot-mic and hot-video(?) consumers 24/7: see Apple’s watch and Facebook’s spyware glasses as the latest attempts to make that behavior socially acceptable. They rapaciously want more data. “They” isn’t a nebulous, unidentifiable term: it’s right here in this thread: LG, Facebook, Google, the FBI, the NSA and whoever else is trying to make a profit out of mass-surveillance. The computers are there collecting data maliciously (as it’s done secretly) and users’ data-connection’s are abused to transmit what is collected.

You continue to ignore all the leaks and literature about America’s intelligence agencies and their global mass-surveillance programs. What even is your rebuttal to Edward Snowden’s leaks?

I guess you’re ignoring the public-news about A.I. companies ‘partnering’ with America’s Department of War and hand waving everything away with a gotcha: oh you’re just talking about a nebulous They™. You’re a contrarian dipshit.

We kill people based on metadata.

—Michael Hayden

The American Government blaming the killing of children on outdated data and computers.

Here’s an article that highlights the duplicitous nature of surveillance-capitalism and its brazenness: Pokemon Go users collected data that will be used to kill people. It was not consensual and it was done in secret.