FreedomAdvocate

joined 10 months ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] FreedomAdvocate 1 points 5 months ago

Even if an external company makes it, they can add an open source mandate if they want.

Sure they could, but like I said, the're isn't really any need for it. It being open source doesn't make it more secure or better by default, but it does means that anyone wanting to exploit it just got handed the full codebase to make it easier.

[–] FreedomAdvocate 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (5 children)

It sounds like you’re supporting compelled speech

How on earth do you come to that conclusion? Do you even know what "compelled speech" is? What is it?

I know you don't know btw, but I will have a good laugh at you trying to explain it.

[–] FreedomAdvocate 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

the actual fascist “nobody deserves to be safe” garbage

Everybody deserves to be safe. What are you talking about? Someone badmouthing you behind your back doesn't make you "unsafe". Despite what you might try to pretend, words are NOT violence.

Just adjust it, you want to use your own personal freedoms as a cludge to undermine the rights of others.

How? What am I saying that even remotely hints at anything like this?

[–] FreedomAdvocate 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The glasses don't record and stream all the time btw. They don't have their own built in wireless connection to meta.

[–] FreedomAdvocate 1 points 5 months ago (3 children)

People should still have an expectation of privacy in public spaces to some extent

Why? You're in a public space. You don't have privacy when you're out in public. There are already laws around taking photos of minors etc, but it being able to be done via glasses is no different to it being able to be done with a phone or a camera.

[–] FreedomAdvocate 1 points 5 months ago (9 children)

If I don’t have any income I can’t eat and will die.

Plenty of people don't have any income and can still eat and don't die. This alone proves you wrong.

[–] FreedomAdvocate -1 points 5 months ago (14 children)

Israel don't make Android. Apps can't override how android disables apps at an OS level.

[–] FreedomAdvocate 3 points 6 months ago (16 children)

The app’s privacy settings claim that users can disable this data collection by turning off “AppCloud” in the app list.

They don’t just “claim” that - that’s how Android works lol.

So in short the whole article could have just been “disable this app and you don’t have to worry about it”. Doesn’t have as much of a tinfoil ring to it I guess?

[–] FreedomAdvocate 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Valuing convenience over other things doesn’t make someone an idiot. As with everything, you evaluate a product on the benefits it gives vs the drawbacks it brings. For most people the benefits of cloud/online syncing far outweighs the drawbacks.

[–] FreedomAdvocate 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Just be aware that, unless they’ve changed this since I last looked, when you do this it strips out all of the metadata and provides it all in a single file which you would then have to find software to write it back on to every photo (if you want the metadata that is).

[–] FreedomAdvocate -4 points 6 months ago (8 children)

If you don’t have cameras you instantly lose a tonne of potential amazing functionality.

If you’re in public you have no expectation of privacy, so someone being able to photograph you or record you with glasses is no different to being able to do it with a camera or phone.

[–] FreedomAdvocate 1 points 6 months ago (11 children)

This is like talking to a brick wall. If you don’t have a job you still have those costs, so that means those costs are not work related so can’t be claimed as tax deductions.

view more: ‹ prev next ›