121–130 of 146 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How-so less clear-cut? Mysterious and Chinesey so perhaps?
The ostensible business models of the companies at play. Stop looking at any opportunity to bark as Sinophobia.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That won’t protect you from its propaganda/censorship. Some versions of DeepSeek’s models have bias built in - as in it’s not just implemented by their service/app. But offline does protect you from privacy/security issues.
>Some versions of DeepSeek’s models have bias built in Is this empirically supported? IME it doesn't hesitate to talk about Tienanmen Square or whatever, so if there's "bias" it must be very well hidden.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In case this is not clear enough: you'd better come up with some real arguments with concrete evidence, or move on. Nobody has time for meaningless speculation.
This is a rare example where I actually think Meta should be providing the evidence, and not the other way around. When you have a history of doing greasy shit, you don't get the benefit of the doubt.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought Apple disallowed apps using HTTP years ago?
Apple disallowed HTTP by default, you can flip a bit in the config to allowlist some/all endpoints to HTTP. Not clear what the App Store actually does when reviewing this info when you submit.
[1] https://www.nowsecure.com/blog/2017/12/29/enable-ios-app-tra...
[2] https://developer.apple.com/news/?id=12212016b
[3] https://www.klundberg.com/blog/app-transport-security-delay/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How much did Zuckerberg pay for WhatsApp again?
If the argument is that there's no credible evidence, retorting with a vague question doesn't really help your case. If anything it reinforces the original claim that there's no credible evidence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's nice. I'll remember that next time I talk about beyblades to a friend in WhatsApp and see adds for them on Reddit the next day.
The truth is even worse; reddit has enough of a profile built on you that they can predict your penchant for beyblades without even needing your whatsapp chats.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's basically no credible evidence of this happening. All there is are vague anecdotes which are easily explained with confirmation bias and/or the birthday paradox.
Weird hill to die on, man. Like, sure credible evidence is one of the most important things in the world... but what, are you honestly saying that you're going to be surprised if WhatsApp turned out to be leaking data? We don't need the pitchforks just yet, sure, but shit, you have to remain realistic about these things.
Your words, not mine. I never made such claims, and you're trying to move the goalposts from "Meta does this" to "I'll be surprised if Meta does this".