Two things:1.
-
With all that is always happening, at this point I assume state actors are pushing it.
@KanaMauna @Ashedryden "State actor" is a peculiar way of describing the legislative body of a country, but it isn't wrong. -
RE: https://mastodon.social/@verge/116041069446538092
Two things:
1. We are creating a two-tiered internet that will see people willing to give up their IDs having one experience while those who can’t, won’t, or don’t have them missing out on those experiences or being outright excluded from whole areas of the web2. Why you would be willing to give up your ID to web services that have such poor security in a time when identity is being weaponized by state actors is beyond me
I think for a lot of us this is already the case that we just don’t computer the way the majority do: we don’t use the same OS, applications, browsers, chat apps, social networks, search engines, media, or even read the same news.
We interact with corporate silos through sock puppets. Which ID laws will close that loop. And we’ll be forced to decide if we want to keep a prescience on that side of the wall at all.
-
RE: https://mastodon.social/@verge/116041069446538092
Two things:
1. We are creating a two-tiered internet that will see people willing to give up their IDs having one experience while those who can’t, won’t, or don’t have them missing out on those experiences or being outright excluded from whole areas of the web2. Why you would be willing to give up your ID to web services that have such poor security in a time when identity is being weaponized by state actors is beyond me
@Ashedryden if its done right they will be using federation with an identity provider whom people do trust, but I doubt that will happen as identity in itself = $$$ in the marketing world.
-
RE: https://mastodon.social/@verge/116041069446538092
Two things:
1. We are creating a two-tiered internet that will see people willing to give up their IDs having one experience while those who can’t, won’t, or don’t have them missing out on those experiences or being outright excluded from whole areas of the web2. Why you would be willing to give up your ID to web services that have such poor security in a time when identity is being weaponized by state actors is beyond me
@Ashedryden But why on god's green earth would you want to use Discord?
-
With all that is always happening, at this point I assume state actors are pushing it.
@KanaMauna @Ashedryden
Thats quite sure, states are either already fascist or at least having actors preparing that way, making sure that people are anywhere ever identified is very important for them -
@Ashedryden I wish people could of ALWAYS seen this coming.
@Netraven @Ashedryden those with so-called "Cassandra Syndrome" could have warned of this, but are, alas, cursed with being ignored.
#actuallyautistic @autistics -
@Ashedryden teamspeak is great for voice, but someone NEEDS to make a better alternative for chatting. i haven't found a platform that works nearly as well as discord, and it sucks.
@mochabeau @Ashedryden Agreed, as to the need for a better alternative, however the "QOS rules" conundrum is very difficult to solve:
Owl Eyes (@d1@autistics.life)
@Lockdownyourlife@infosec.exchange No matter what alternative video conferencing solution you pick, alas, it will live and die by how well the network routers that you traverse, treat your traffic fairly - governed by the invisible, so-called "QOS rules". "QOS" is short for "Quality Of Service", and is a technical term that Professional Network Administrators know. *Governments who don't favor "network neutrality" will almost certainly have these QOS rules skewed to the favor of the tech bros, who can afford to hire lobbyists - unlike people like you.* Unfavorable QOS rules will silently tackle down your praiseworthy efforts and unfortunately make you look bad, because you picked a solution which ultimately "didn't work" *through no fault of your own*. Whomever tries alternatives like #Jitsi, #XMPP, etc: you'll likely get silently tripped up on/mired by QOS rules when talking to *some* of your contacts. Even though I don't praise or advocate the Zooms of the world - that's where you'll likely be limping back to, unfortunately. Having said all this, I'd suggest giving #Signal video chats a cautious try. It might work for *smallish* numbers of people having group video chats. #infosec
Autistics Life Community (autistics.life)
-
RE: https://mastodon.social/@verge/116041069446538092
Two things:
1. We are creating a two-tiered internet that will see people willing to give up their IDs having one experience while those who can’t, won’t, or don’t have them missing out on those experiences or being outright excluded from whole areas of the web2. Why you would be willing to give up your ID to web services that have such poor security in a time when identity is being weaponized by state actors is beyond me
@Ashedryden Fully agree with you on 2.
As for two-tier internet - ever since some clever clogs came up with the magic word "premium", segregation was born. Not too many complaints neither, looks like. -
@mochabeau @Ashedryden Agreed, as to the need for a better alternative, however the "QOS rules" conundrum is very difficult to solve:
Owl Eyes (@d1@autistics.life)
@Lockdownyourlife@infosec.exchange No matter what alternative video conferencing solution you pick, alas, it will live and die by how well the network routers that you traverse, treat your traffic fairly - governed by the invisible, so-called "QOS rules". "QOS" is short for "Quality Of Service", and is a technical term that Professional Network Administrators know. *Governments who don't favor "network neutrality" will almost certainly have these QOS rules skewed to the favor of the tech bros, who can afford to hire lobbyists - unlike people like you.* Unfavorable QOS rules will silently tackle down your praiseworthy efforts and unfortunately make you look bad, because you picked a solution which ultimately "didn't work" *through no fault of your own*. Whomever tries alternatives like #Jitsi, #XMPP, etc: you'll likely get silently tripped up on/mired by QOS rules when talking to *some* of your contacts. Even though I don't praise or advocate the Zooms of the world - that's where you'll likely be limping back to, unfortunately. Having said all this, I'd suggest giving #Signal video chats a cautious try. It might work for *smallish* numbers of people having group video chats. #infosec
Autistics Life Community (autistics.life)
@d1 @Ashedryden is that an issue for chat, though? i got voice calls down great, its the roles and level of categorization over messages is what i miss often
-
RE: https://mastodon.social/@verge/116041069446538092
Two things:
1. We are creating a two-tiered internet that will see people willing to give up their IDs having one experience while those who can’t, won’t, or don’t have them missing out on those experiences or being outright excluded from whole areas of the web2. Why you would be willing to give up your ID to web services that have such poor security in a time when identity is being weaponized by state actors is beyond me
And someone is going to make a random identity generator page of any country you choose and random faces of different poses. Complete with random lists of where you went to school, first pet, etc, in a printable fact page. What are they going to do, try and verify?
-
@d1 @Ashedryden is that an issue for chat, though? i got voice calls down great, its the roles and level of categorization over messages is what i miss often
@mochabeau @Ashedryden well, maybe #Zulip? Or #DeltaChat, if you really want end-to-end encryption of group chats (but no control of roles)? #XMPP also has good group delegation, but the #OMEMO encryption can have less reliable delivery in groups, with various members disappearing for spells of time.
-
@d1 @Ashedryden is that an issue for chat, though? i got voice calls down great, its the roles and level of categorization over messages is what i miss often
@mochabeau @Ashedryden as to teamspeak, I would personally try to find something #OpenSource
-
RE: https://mastodon.social/@verge/116041069446538092
Two things:
1. We are creating a two-tiered internet that will see people willing to give up their IDs having one experience while those who can’t, won’t, or don’t have them missing out on those experiences or being outright excluded from whole areas of the web2. Why you would be willing to give up your ID to web services that have such poor security in a time when identity is being weaponized by state actors is beyond me
@Ashedryden You can still chat by typing without the video on IRC.
-
@Ashedryden Someone should make a biometric randomization app already, which takes your likeness and then change the core face metrics randomly.
@koen_hufkens @Ashedryden bio-obfuscation, basically a deepfake where the end face is ai generated.
A pretty good idea.
The hardest part is doing it in a undetectable way (catching the camera feed and changing it before it reaches the requesting app) -
@Ashedryden What protections do we have as users? None. I'll willingly go into the dark over this. Eventually I'll have to use pigeons and smoke signals to communicate with the world.
Can't rely on pigeons either...
FAQ
They used to be. Until the U.S. Government replaced them with drone replicas designed to spy on the American public. Founded in 1976.
Birds Aren't Real (birdsarentreal.com)
-
RE: https://mastodon.social/@verge/116041069446538092
Two things:
1. We are creating a two-tiered internet that will see people willing to give up their IDs having one experience while those who can’t, won’t, or don’t have them missing out on those experiences or being outright excluded from whole areas of the web2. Why you would be willing to give up your ID to web services that have such poor security in a time when identity is being weaponized by state actors is beyond me
-
RE: https://mastodon.social/@verge/116041069446538092
Two things:
1. We are creating a two-tiered internet that will see people willing to give up their IDs having one experience while those who can’t, won’t, or don’t have them missing out on those experiences or being outright excluded from whole areas of the web2. Why you would be willing to give up your ID to web services that have such poor security in a time when identity is being weaponized by state actors is beyond me
@Ashedryden @wellingtonrock @verge
My initial feeling that someone simply wants to kill such platforms entirely.
-
RE: https://mastodon.social/@verge/116041069446538092
Two things:
1. We are creating a two-tiered internet that will see people willing to give up their IDs having one experience while those who can’t, won’t, or don’t have them missing out on those experiences or being outright excluded from whole areas of the web2. Why you would be willing to give up your ID to web services that have such poor security in a time when identity is being weaponized by state actors is beyond me
@Ashedryden It's more likely I'll be giving up the services that require these things.
Some will be difficult, of course, but if enough of us do walk away will that have an impact?
-
@mochabeau @Ashedryden well, maybe #Zulip? Or #DeltaChat, if you really want end-to-end encryption of group chats (but no control of roles)? #XMPP also has good group delegation, but the #OMEMO encryption can have less reliable delivery in groups, with various members disappearing for spells of time.
-
RE: https://mastodon.social/@verge/116041069446538092
Two things:
1. We are creating a two-tiered internet that will see people willing to give up their IDs having one experience while those who can’t, won’t, or don’t have them missing out on those experiences or being outright excluded from whole areas of the web2. Why you would be willing to give up your ID to web services that have such poor security in a time when identity is being weaponized by state actors is beyond me
They already have your ID like 10x over from all the other things you've been forced to give it for and all the public data breaches, so it barely matters anyway for most people.
