cultural reviewer and dabbler in stylistic premonitions

  • 7 Posts
  • 25 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: January 17th, 2022

help-circle
  • Arthur Besse@lemmy.mltoPrivacy@lemmy.mlFirefox alternatives?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    https://digdeeper.club/articles/browsers.xhtml has a somewhat comprehensive analysis of a large number of browsers you might consider, illuminating depressing (and sometimes surprising) privacy problems with literally all of them.

    In the end it absurdly recommends something which forked from Firefox a very long time ago, which is obviously not a reasonable choice from a security standpoint. I don’t have a good recommendation, but I definitely don’t agree with that article’s conclusion: privacy features are pointless if your browser is trivially vulnerable to exploits for a plethora of old bugs, which will inevitably be the case for a volunteer-run project that diverged from Firefox a long time ago and thus cannot benefit from Mozilla’s security fixes in each new release.

    However, despite its ridiculous conclusion, that page’s analysis is still useful in in deciding which of the terrible options to pick.




  • i don’t usually cross-post my comments but I think this one from a cross-post of this meme in programmerhumor is worth sharing here:

    The statement in this meme is false. There are many programming languages which can be written by humans but which are intended primarily to be generated by other programs (such as compilers for higher-level languages).

    The distinction can sometimes be missed even by people who are successfully writing code in these languages; this comment from Jeffrey Friedl (author of the book Mastering Regular Expressions) stuck with me:

    I’ve written full-fledged applications in PostScript – it can be done – but it’s important to remember that PostScript has been designed for machine-generated scripts. A human does not normally code in PostScript directly, but rather, they write a program in another language that produces PostScript to do what they want. (I realized this after having written said applications :-)) —Jeffrey

    (there is a lot of fascinating history in that thread on his blog…)



  • What the people here saying this “seems legit” are really saying is that, if the site is providing DRM content which you want to see, then it is indeed using this for its intended purpose (which is to prevent you from recording and/or retransmitting the stream). This is true, but, it doesn’t mean that the site isn’t also collecting your device identifiers and using them for some nefarious privacy-invasive purposes. And of course, they most likely are.

    So if I were you I would look for a pirated streaming website instead of running this proprietary software to watch a DRM’d stream. (The pirated site will probably also be privacy-invasive, but they won’t get your device ID… and you’re more likely to be able to block its ads.)
















  • They only do that if you are a threat.

    Lmao. Even CBP does not claim that. On the contrary, they say (and courts have so far agreed) that they can perform these types of border searches without any probable cause, and even without reasonable suspicion (a weaker legal standard than probable cause).

    In practice they routinely do it to people who are friends with someone (or recently interacted with someone on social media) who they think could be a threat, as well as to people who have a name similar to someone else they’re interested in for whatever reason, or if the CBP officer just feels like it - often because of what the person looks like.

    It’s nice for you that you feel confident that you won’t be subjected to this kind of thing, but you shouldn’t assume OP and other people don’t need to be prepared for it.