291–300 of 321 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My solution was to give the iPad to my kid and get an Android.
Not sure if this was intended but this comment is actually kind of funny considering Android's lack of updates is a frequent point of criticism. Update notifications are probably the one thing you don't have to worry about with Android. On a more serious note, in my opinion updates are an exemption and the user should be urged to do them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree and that goal sounds similar to the goal of Kill Analytics [1]. "The industry" doesn't even exist as an entity. Gov regulation seems like the only viable way to fix it. But on the other hand, Google AdSense has done a lot to improve advertising online. Popups and bad ads used to be waaay worse than they are now (not that they are okay now). So maybe we do just need a few big players to step up and change thin…
Does anyone know how this is different from/compares to Privacy Badger[1]? It is also a chrome[2] and firefox extension[3]. [1]: https://www.eff.org/privacybadger [2]: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/privacy-badger/pke... [3]: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/privacy-badge...
Kill Analytics looks more offensive. It actively sends garbage data to the analytics platform, thus destroying its value proposition to the site operator and discouraging its continued use.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Going forward, you can append "+whatever" to the username portion of your email address, e.g. You+spam@gmail.com, and gmail and most other providers I've used will ignore that part. Use it to trace the sharing of that address. I used that when signing up for a particular mailing list and found that my address was shared with about a dozen other marketers.
People have learned that you can simply strip that part out of the address... it's in the standard. If you want to know where your data leaked out, you should use a different email every time (e.g. use your own domains).
I'll take "Common RFC 821/2321/5321 myths" for $300, please.
RFC 5322 and RFC 5321 are very emphatic that the local part has no semantics whatsoever except those given to it by the MTA. There is no semantics for what "+" means in the standards.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In general, I'm disappointed how Amazon went from being a store to a "marketplace". Sometimes I want to buy somebody who'll actually curate their list of products and has a reputation to stand behind that they don't want to sully by selling garbage or price-gouging on items they don't normally stock. But maybe that's just me.
I buy a lot of used, old, obscure things (mostly books). Very often, Amazon is the only place I can find it reliably; my other options would probably be asking my Japanese/German/etc friends to dig through second hand shops and mail it to me. I love the Amazon marketplace. (I also hate the 3rd party seller feedback emails but I have strict email filters so who cares)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Never click a spammer's "unsubscribe" links -- that just tells them they have a valid account. If you use a big email provider like gmail, flag them as spam. Otherwise, make a rule in your mail client to automatically file anything from their domain to the trash.
I don't think spammers care about the difference between an email they have and an email they have that clicked a link. They're going to spam both anyway.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
LinkedIn is one of the most common examples when talking about dark patterns, their most famous being the number of ways they tried to get you to invite your gmail contacts.
Just reinstalled Skype and can see that they're trying to get access to my contacts also. They tell you to set up access so you can use the app. First up is microphone, and you click allow. Second is camera, and you click allow. Third is contacts, and you click—wait a minute, why do you need this? Disallow. Don't know what they would do if they got my contacts (hopefully not spam them like LinkedIn), and don't intend…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even worse; let's break backwards compatibility with your paid software so that you have to purchase an upgrade license... If you've had a Mac long enough and you run paid software you know what I'm talking about. :(
Considering the wide availability of beta OS updates, I'd say that's on the developers of said software. Sure, as someone who works in audio and has to deal with a range of software instruments/effects and audio interface drivers, I know exactly what you're talking about and I have little understanding for developers expensive software/hardware that don't test and fix their products before OS releases.
Why? If the developers produced a product that works and sold it to a user at a fair price, why on earth should those developers then have some sort of indefinite responsibility for producing updates because other people chose to break compatibility?
There is a reason we have standards and there is a reason it's important for system software in particular to define and support standard interfaces. In fact, that is arguably the primary function of an operating system: to provide a stable platform on which other software can run.
The fact that some of the main OS providers no longer seem to recognise this and instead consider instability and backward-incompatibility to be strategic assets makes me genuinely afraid for the near future of our industry. If I want to do something as simple as buying a laptop for one of my small businesses tomorrow, so someone can get on with useful work and will be able to continue doing so for a long time, there are currently no good options available.
Does it count if there's no user interface? Amazon has my email address, I've been a customer since the late-nineties. They keep inventing new email lists and signing me up for them. Each time I get a new "newsletter" it says something like, "You got this message because you're subscribed to the 'Tablet News' newsletter." I click the unsubscribe link to remove myself from it. Along with the unsubscribe link there's a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just reinstalled Skype and can see that they're trying to get access to my contacts also. They tell you to set up access so you can use the app. First up is microphone, and you click allow. Second is camera, and you click allow. Third is contacts, and you click—wait a minute, why do you need this? Disallow. Don't know what they would do if they got my contacts (hopefully not spam them like LinkedIn), and don't intend…
Well considering that Skype is mainly a way to, you know, contact people it doesn't seem actually insane to consider it.
I've thought of this with the mobile revolution. You could never have introduced total device lock down and ubiquitous telemetry so easily in the PC era. There would have been an outcry. But change the form factor...