281–290 of 412 posts
I heard the new division of ICE that is implementing these investigations is called Government Ethics, Security & Transparency Agency for Public Operations , with some kind of acronym I couldn't quite hear.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is this obstruction? Unless it's part of a proper investigation, they are just another private individual. You are free to do or not engage in business contracts with them, and any data given true or false or data not gievn can hardly be a criminal matter as its not an investigation and simply a business dealing between two parties.
A company is absolutely free to choose whether or not to do business with them, but an employee acting to try to undermine them as a customer or their relationship with the business is what would open the door to all these sort of laws and consequences, especially when that relationship is precisely in the furtherance of a law enforcement purposes, and the interference was motivated by an effort to impair that enforc…
This is why you must block all ads always. No exceptions.
I've argued for a long time that adblocking isn't just a quality of life thing, it's an essential security control for browsing the Internet in the same way that patching your system and running malware protection is. I didn't expect it to be protecting your physical security quite so soon.. This sort of thing should also help put the "adblocking is unethical" argument to bed.
Finally. There are a lot of high profile YouTubers who have been saying this like LinusTechTips.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can avoid coke but approximately every brand in the supermarket is funding ad-tech. And even if you can find brands that don't, your supermarket is likely funding ad-tech to advertise itself so you can't go to there at all. Maybe you still have a farmer's market but chances are that they're advertising online. You can't buy a car or any smartphones you've ever heard of, you won't find an ISP that doesn't advertis…
There's a large difference in the magnitude of spending. A big chain like kroger, for example, is spending around 10 to 100M. Coke is spending around $5B. Avoiding national branded products goes a long way in avoiding contributing to the problem. Things don't need to be all or nothing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A company is absolutely free to choose whether or not to do business with them, but an employee acting to try to undermine them as a customer or their relationship with the business is what would open the door to all these sort of laws and consequences, especially when that relationship is precisely in the furtherance of a law enforcement purposes, and the interference was motivated by an effort to impair that enforc…
An employees actions would be a matter of judgment between the company leadership and themsleves, I don't understand how it's a criminal matter. To the outside entity it's a business contract, to the company it's an internal matter if and how to deal with any specific activities of the employee.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An employees actions would be a matter of judgment between the company leadership and themsleves, I don't understand how it's a criminal matter. To the outside entity it's a business contract, to the company it's an internal matter if and how to deal with any specific activities of the employee.
You're granting an employee a special status that doesn't exist. Imagine a random person working to undermine a contract between the government and a business, motivated by an effort to obstruct law enforcement from enforcing the law. I'm sure you'd agree that this would obviously be illegal - that doesn't change simply because the person happens to be working for the business in question.
I love this. All these years I've been a privacy enthusiast lunatic, because ofc no-one has anything to hide. Now ad trackers are being potentially weaponised by the govt, and ofc no-one could have foreseen that. This is absolute gold. Will be patiently waiting for recall install's to start sending screenshots to ice of your private documents and comm's.
This has bean a long time coming. This is a stark reminder that you should consider who the future stewards of whatever you are building might be. We built a vast surveillance network under the guise of servings ads and making money, and lost track of how this power could be abused by an entity not aligned with our own values.
Don't lump me in that "we". I did no such thing. I know exactly how it could be abused and have spent 12 years intentionally not working for companies that perpetuate it.
What are you doing to organize around that?
Or is it just “I decided to leave so my hands are clean” self adoration?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is this obstruction? Unless it's part of a proper investigation, they are just another private individual. You are free to do or not engage in business contracts with them, and any data given true or false or data not gievn can hardly be a criminal matter as its not an investigation and simply a business dealing between two parties.
A company is absolutely free to choose whether or not to do business with them, but an employee acting to try to undermine them as a customer or their relationship with the business is what would open the door to all these sort of laws and consequences, especially when that relationship is precisely in the furtherance of a law enforcement purposes, and the interference was motivated by an effort to impair that enforc…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Atomization enables this. Any number of individuals are individually weak against their employer/some org, but a big group of them can be quite powerful. If many were to sacrifice their morals out of financial pressure easily (the control over which is in increasingly few hands) the path the US is treading becomes pretty deterministic... We've seen it in the movies and read it in the books. You guys seem to need coll…
> You guys One of the reasons I chose to move to Europe is because I value the mininal safety nets and labor protections on this side of the pond. Yes, I make less money and pay more taxes but I believe this is how society should work, I reject the hyper individualism that ignores any sort of collective. But I am also not naive. Expecting individuals to take the burden for decisions way beyond their control is silly.…
No charity from church or family needed. Just the State- and it does not care about your religion or sexual preferences.