this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2026
236 points (98.8% liked)

Privacy

49105 readers
677 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The UK government is giving Apple and Google three months to build on-device scanning infrastructure. This isn't about child safety; it's about the end of private devices and the death of the "nothing to hide" fallacy.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TheIPW@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 hours ago

The UK PM has just announced an under-16 social media ban.

This is the 'Trojan Horse' in action. You cannot enforce a ban without an Age Verification layer, and you can’t have Age Verification without a National Digital ID or biometric database. They are using the 'child safety' card to build a mandatory surveillance gate for the entire internet.

Between the new taxes and the constant bans, it’s clear this government has zero respect for personal agency or digital sovereignty. If you aren't already moving your data off the cloud and into your own home lab, start now. The gap between our current society and a total surveillance state just got a whole lot smaller.

[–] dropdrip@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

This post is acrid; I'm venting. You'll probably feel attacked.

I'd like a serious answer, but I'll probably will only get replies from petulant adult-children though. That's not a provocative jab; it's a statement of disgust. The whole consumer side of tech is largely adult-children who fail to take any responsibility. This isn't even new. From day dot commercial software vendors have been exploiting you.

the market only has two offerings: Google's Android and Apple's

Does no one see an issue with this? A duopoly? It's not even one market in one country, it's nearly a duopoly on a global scale.

get mad at increasing surveillance by surveillance companies (Google, Apple, et al.)

scream at internet, for the Nth time

Just don't use them.

but my Discord my Bank apppppp~

You're all willingly giving up your autonomy whilst crying about it. Why? Just why? The alternatives aren't good enough for your pampered ass? Stick an external battery to the pinephone and suddenly it lasts for two days.

That's too goofy; what would my friends think of me?

Install GrapheneOS on models that support it.

Too many buttons to click; it should all be done for me. Waaaaaa~

Too hard to escape the Google/Apple ecosystem

Are you all for real? Pressing buttons on your computer is too hard? Holy shit.

[–] anotherspinelessdem@lemmy.ml 51 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This is the UK, not China. Or at least, it’s supposed to be.

What are we, a bunch of Asians?

[–] SupremeDonut@lemmy.ml 19 points 2 days ago (3 children)

That's based on government surveillance, not skin color. As reductionist as it is, China has been the poster boy for government surveillance since the 90s at very least.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] goatmeal@midwest.social 44 points 3 days ago (1 children)

We’re moving towards a world where everyone has an approved device for official purposes and anyone who wants privacy has a second Linux/alternate android OS device for everything else 😬

[–] Squizzy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Nah they can get fucked altogether. I dont need their one.

[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 59 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It's never been about protecting children, that's how it's been sold to the people who aren't paying attention. That always works, that or "terrorism".

Prompt people to fear for their kids, or fear other people, and they can be manipulated. Fear and anger are much stronger than love and compassion, unfortunately.

[–] FineCoatMummy@sh.itjust.works 16 points 3 days ago

That always works, that or “terrorism”.

Seems like a good place to leave this link. For those who haven't seen it,

Timothy May, 1988, the Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse.

Fun fact. Timothy May was also the guy who discovered in 1979 that low level radiation was causing memory errors in computers.

[–] LimaBaos@lemmy.world 49 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (4 children)

There was never a better moment for linux to shine than now. C'mon smart people, do something for the dumb stupid generic user. An actual good usable linux distro for phones, bring back firefox os.

[–] anotherspinelessdem@lemmy.ml 34 points 3 days ago

C'mon smart people, do something for the dumb stupid generic user.

Pay them. I'm sure they'd be happy to do it inexpensively if they can live off their labor.

[–] FineCoatMummy@sh.itjust.works 21 points 3 days ago (1 children)

There was never a better moment for linux to shine than now.

Maybe so. Maybe so.

But I'm not so sure there is a long term tech solution. It's a political problem. Ultimately, if the gov requires let's say a trust attestation for the use of web sites, they will have to comply, or leave the market. Sure, you can run Linux. But now you can't use it to bank, to shop, to access gov services, to pay your bills... If they push hard enough, even mundane shit like get a weather forecast or w/e. Google would already love this. It locks everybody in.

A gov can make life VERY difficult for noncompliance, by leaning on the things you want to do. Sometimes, a site that isn't local like a bank can say, fine, we'll leave that market. But the bigger the market, the less they wanna do that. What happens if the US follows the UK into this? And then Australia or Japan piles on? Plus, some things are local by definition. Like your bank. If it's required to block non-trusted (I threw up in my mouth a little bit...) devices, it will have to do that.

I'm not sure Linux can save us. Maybe it can buy us a little time. But in the end, this needs a political solution. Not a tech one.

[–] shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

There will be two forms of the internet. One will be the clearnet, where everything is monitored and controlled, and the other will be Tor and I2P, where you still have freedom to be an actual person. Also, mesh networks like MeshCore and Reticulum.

The internet can be gated because it requires you connecting to central infrastructure and a central operator has to assign you an address where something like reticulum requires no central authority because it's based on public-private keys and so anybody can connect to the network permissionlessly

[–] other_cat@piefed.zip 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

I'm starting to look into the 'other' as you say here, but there's a lot to learn, and it can be hard to figure out at times. I tried to get Yggdrasil set up on my computer and just kept running into wall after wall, it was very disheartening. Going to take a break from it and learn about onion addresses instead, I guess.

[–] shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip 2 points 11 hours ago

I have only heard of Yggdrasil recently so I don't know much about it. Tor works quite well but I2P has disappointed me every time I've tried to use it. Mainly because of its connection speeds.

I can pull blocks from my Monero node at 5 mbps over Tor hidden services, but only about 40 kbps over I2P. That makes Monero completely unusable.

When you set up I2P on your computer, it takes you through a step where it supposedly measures your bandwidth, but it's a really sucky test, and sets your bandwidth incredibly low, and you have to manually up it if you want more. Like for example, I have a 100 MBPS symmetrical fiber connection and it wanted to set my bandwidth with the automatic test to like 600 kbps.

I think that's part of why the network sucks so much because the automatic test doesn't nearly set your bandwidth to what it should be. So it's not taking advantage of nearly the bandwidth that's available on connections.

[–] pineapple@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What the hell is this take. Firstly your cooling the average user dumb which is just kinda rude and untrue, Also developers are working really hard to build the best possible Linux experience for everyone. how about you actually chip in before shaming them for not working hard enough. And Linux is already user friendly enough for most people, arguably more user friendly than windows. People just want to stick to what they know, also vendor lock in, and most people don't know how to install Linux and will just use the default operating system. I don't think Linux devs can do anything to fix any of those problems.

[–] LimaBaos@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Chill out, dude. Drink some water. I don't know how the hell you got offended by my comment. I pointed out this is a perfect opportunity for another phone os to popup (hopefully linux based) in a jokey way, even calling us users stupid (look up "c'mon, do your thing/do something". I can't believe you've never came across this meme before). I never said devs aren't doing enough, you assumed that. Linux user friendly enough for most people? The most trivial thing for you can be really complex for others without experience. First time you can't fix something exclusively using the UI, people will bail. Users need to be able to solve things intuitively. "touch button, thing happen". There isn't anything intuitive about opening terminal to install an app from the repository because the default app store version is broken. This is where you're right: people will stick to what's familiar. Someone bought a pc that came with Linux and gave it a try. Installed google chrome and it wasn't loading videos, looked up quickly how to fix it and the first link, or even a chatbot, told them to open the terminal and type a bunch of nonsense. User will close the browser and ask a cousin or whatever to install Windows for them because they just wanted to watch youtube while studying (even though the steps for the fix were just copy/paste). And you missed the point confusing enthusiasts with regular users. Nobody will need to learn how to install an os that comes by default on the phone, but no company will want to ship a phone with an os that doesn't have potential or a big userbase of enthusiasts (those are the ones that will learn how to install Linux). Android started as a startup that showed something with potential before eventually being bought. Graphene os, despite being based on Android, is growing well, so much so that they partnered with Motorola to ship enterprise phones with it installed. It's just silly to think there is nothing the community can do. People created amazing stuff before, and will do it again when some feel like it.

[–] pineapple@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago

Sorry, I didn't catch on to the embedded sarcasm part. Anyhow back to arguing.

Linux user friendly enough for most people? The most trivial thing for you can be really complex for others without experience.

I have seen windows users use macOS for the first time and vise versa. Neither windows or macOS are intuitive. What do you mean you have to open a browser and download an exe file and then open it (said some macOS user)? Why does your window snapping barely work? (said some windows user) I'd say a first time user would consider linux more intuitive than either macos or windows.

There isn’t anything intuitive about opening terminal to install an app from the repository because the default app store version is broken.

Yeah this is true, kinda funny when people use chatgpt for help and the first thing it always says is open terminal.

And to be fare just last night I installed fedora on some laptop with an old fedora 42 iso and I tried to update it to fedora 44 using the gui software manager and it just didn't work. I ended up updating in the terminal.

[–] hirihit640@sh.itjust.works 12 points 3 days ago (2 children)

problem is most smart people are being paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to work for big tech. If open source can start paying developers the same then we'll start to see competition

[–] FineCoatMummy@sh.itjust.works 15 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Story about that. A while ago I sent a $$ contribution to an OSS author who'd built an app I liked for Linux.

He wrote me back. He said mine was the only donation he'd got in the past 2 years.

That's the life of many OSS authors. And yah like you say, the top programmers can go get 1-300K's of dollars or euros or w/e working for big tech.

Many core linux contributions in the kernel or w/e do come from highly paid programmers at big tech co's. So there is that. But run of the mill programs and apps that are still useful day to day, many of those are done for no money.

[–] LimaBaos@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago

The number of apps people created to make something more convenient for themselves and then decided to share with the community is very high.

[–] stoicEuropean@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 days ago

I'd argue that everything big tech produced in this last decade with all that expensive workforce is somewhat unnecessary. If I have a 2026 Linux computer with the capabilities of a 2016s win/mac, I am totally fine and I can do everything I want to do with it.

[–] quick_snail@feddit.nl 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Good thing Android doesn't include Google by default

[–] somegeek@programming.dev 12 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I dont think that will last much longer. We have to work harder on linux phones

[–] quick_snail@feddit.nl 5 points 2 days ago (2 children)

How? Android is open source. You can just fork it

[–] Zerush@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 days ago

All Android forks are, to maintain compatibility with the used apps (LinageOS, e/OS, Degoogled Android ...)

[–] somegeek@programming.dev 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Ok you fork it and create a FOSS mobile OS. If it was that easy we would already have alternatives. The core is open source but google has been and is trying it's best to slowly take over the OS. I'm honestly not very knowledgeable about android so I don't remember the exact details.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] marcie@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] Squizzy@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (7 children)

Absolutely not, it is currently but they are built on googles platform and devices.

Linux phone is what we want

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] minorkeys@sh.itjust.works 14 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Guess i'm going back to no internet, then, probably for the best.

[–] quick_snail@feddit.nl 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Does the UK require ID to buy good 'ol analog porn magazines?

[–] minorkeys@sh.itjust.works 13 points 2 days ago

No but the camera network with constant facial and object recognition will probably track it all anyways.

[–] FriendOfDeSoto@startrek.website 10 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

The UK government is giving Apple and Google three months to build on-device scanning infrastructure.

Nothing has gone through parliament yet. That's not to say that a majority of twats couldn't be found there. But crucially I think this is not something a floundering PM can decree on his own authority. So far this threat is about as believable as any statement by the incumbent American president on Iran.

[–] Cherry@piefed.social 14 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

At what point do we stop carrying around a phone? Or should I call it the snitch in my pocket.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Fleppensteijn@feddit.nl 13 points 3 days ago (2 children)

ultimatum: build device-level scanning to detect “illegal images” or we’ll pass laws to force your hand.

As if Google and Apple wouldn't be more than happy to do this, if they aren't already.

[–] chaos@beehaw.org 9 points 3 days ago

Apple proposed something a few years ago, when governments were making similar threats, that attempted to strike a middle ground. The idea was that upon uploading an image to iCloud Photos, a on-device scan would be run on that image and an encrypted report generated to be sent up along with the photo. There was differential privacy involved, the report would also sometimes be generated for entirely normal photos, so seeing a report didn't necessarily indicate anything, and they had set it up such that the server would only be able to decrypt the reports if it had a sufficiently large number of photos that had been actually found to be CSAM by the local scan, so there would have to be many false positives to incorrectly get flagged.

It was incredibly controversial, and they ended up not doing it after all. In my opinion, it's probably the lightest touch and most responsible way to do something like this, and obviously they always pick the most worthy cause for invading privacy... but I still viscerally dislike the idea that my computer would have code designed to try to get me sent to prison under certain circumstances (not that I'd ever be triggering that code with anything but a false positive of course). Somehow it's worse than just saying "in the cloud you have no privacy, your photos aren't encrypted on our servers, and if you upload CSAM we'll drop a train on you."

[–] LimaBaos@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The amount of stuff their LLMs must've seen by now.

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 6 points 3 days ago (3 children)

good thing it doesn't need therapy. lol

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] DeathsEmbrace@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago

Fascist governments need this level of privacy. If everyone's a criminal then its easier to think this is a good idea.

load more comments
view more: next ›