431–440 of 757 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The selling point of Macs is the Apple ecosystem and UX. If you avoid Apple, what's the point of M1? Linux on equivalent AMDs is cheaper and more compatible.
Wouldn't the M1's power efficiency be applicable on Linux as well?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine things like: - A kitchen with nobody in frame. - A couch with nobody in frame. - Outdoor scenery with nobody in frame. - A bathroom with nobody in frame. Is it hard to believe you wouldn't download something like this without knowing where it came from? I'm not talking about borderline stuff. I'm talking about content that has not even a hint of pornography or illegality.
So why is it in there and why do they care?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The selling point of Macs is the Apple ecosystem and UX. If you avoid Apple, what's the point of M1? Linux on equivalent AMDs is cheaper and more compatible.
> If you avoid Apple, what's the point of M1? - (Potentially) programmable top notch security chip with no overhead encryption - Fanless (Air), cool running, fast processor with very low power consumption - All metal body - Top notch HiDPI screen with color accuracy. - Top notch sensors - Excellent, illuminated keyboard - Big trackpad with pressure sensitivity and taptic engine - Excellent battery life - Excellent ba…
For example, take the monitor - there are monitors with higher refresh rates or more resolution (Retina does 'only' 6K). Also, Mac OS colour processing has no good equivalent elsewhere, so you won't see as much benefit from Apple's monitor without Mac OS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "Impossible to leave" is not a matter of closed or open, but it's a matter of social networks in general. You could make Facebook free software and its problems wouldn't disappear. Not true. If you have interoperability between different networks, you can leave. This is how ActivityPub (e.g. Mastodon, PeerTube, PixelFed) works. > Not to mention that, again, 99% of people will get vendor-locked because in the end no…
> If you have interoperability between different networks, you can leave If all your friends are in a Mastodon instance and you think that instance is scanning your messages, you'll find it hard to leave because leaving the instance for another that doesn't share messages with that one means stopping communication with your friends. > You just switch to any other instance, because Mastodon doesn't prevent you from do…
Everything is controlled by a third party except self-hosting. Mastodon allows that too. Closed networks don't.
> Yes, you can switch to ProtonMail or something more secure if you want
So you answered your own question.
> but that won't solve the problems of the 99% of people that will use general providers and won't even know they can't switch.
My point is that they are able to switch due to the openness of the platform.
> Right now you could force Facebook to be interoperable and be open source and still 99% of the people would be on the original Facebook instance. Again, it's not a technical issue.
Yes. It's not just a technical problem. But there is a technical side in it. Millions will immediately switch given a possibility. What happens next, who knows.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact that even the 'smart' people from HN can't wait for their new M1 laptop to arrive convinced me that humans are a lost cause.
So, it’s not that other platforms are any better! Are you sure intel, AMD, Arm or windows TPM aren’t snitching on you? Do we need to make our own silicon from ingot? There’s no technological solution to this problem, only social and legislative.
>The system that scans cloud drives for illegal images was created by Microsoft and Dartmouth College and donated to NCMEC. The organization creates signatures of the worst known images of child pornography, approximately 16,000 files at present. These file signatures are given to service providers who then try to match them to user files in order to prevent further distribution of the images themselves, a Microsoft spokesperson told NBC News. (Microsoft implemented image-matching technology in its own services, such as Bing and SkyDrive.)
https://www.nbcnews.com/technolog/your-cloud-drive-really-pr...
Didn't the Windows 10 TOS extend that scanning to local storage as well?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have direct knowledge of examples of where individuals were arrested and convicted of sharing CP online and they were identified because a previous employer I worked for used PhotoDNA analysis on all user uploaded images. So yeah, this type of thing can catch bad people. I’m still not convinced Apple doing this is a good thing, especially on private media content without a warrant, even though the technology can he…
now im afraid, i have two young children < 5 years old. i have occasionally took pictures of them naked with some bumps on the skin or mosquito bite and sent them to my wife over whatsapp to look at and decide do we need to send them to doctor, do i have to fear now that i will be marked as distributing CP.
Your intent when producing the image was irrelevant.
How do they determine if an image is child porn? My wife has an iPhone and we take pictures of our baby daughter on it, sometimes in diapers and sometimes naked. Our intentions are not pornographic but now I am worried about apple's algorithm flagging them as such. Has apple published its training data somewhere?
It just gathers hashes without judging or interpreting. This is the first phase. When a child porn picture is discovered and inquired about, they just compare the hash of it with what they have on database and see who had that picture on their phone as well, allowing them to build a nicely timelined trace of it and even discover the first source.
This is something that child porn enthusiasts using apple would invest their time and money into. A regular person would not think to do this (yet).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does that mean if someone spends time and effort writing a book or painting a picture that I can resell it for less than them without their permission?
Why would any fan of someones work buy a knock-off copy? We can safely assume they are a fan, otherwise why would even buy it? Also, painting is a physical object. It's a one of a kind. EDIT: your objection and many many other questions like that are nicely argued against here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhBpI13dxkI (The Surprising History of Copyright talk by Karl Fogel)