Still, if the service is supposed to be security and privacy-oriented, how about you make the source-code available, so users can verify this for themselves?
PierceTheBubble
joined 1 week ago
proprietary encryption algorithms verified by thought-leading cybersecurity experts and communities worldwide
Trust the experts bro
AI risk management, what could possibly go wrong?
Of course, make an anti-feature part of an integral part, which coincidentally also happens to handle personal files...
McCormick, who Zuck noted would be focusing much of her energy on "partnering with governments and sovereigns to build, deploy, invest in, and finance Meta's infrastructure."
Meta last week signed three new long-term contracts with TerraPower, Oklo, and Vistra for nuclear energy. Combined with the company's existing commitments with Constellation Energy, the Social Network has now contracted for roughly 6.6 gigawatts of atomic power
It's all just so soul crushingly in the open and shameless
Ah, the good ol' revolving door politics
More eyes in the sky. It seems like even pigeons aren't save from being replaced by technology...
Couldn't agree more
Honestly, the tech seems quite impressive. But I wouldn't touch Amazon-backed smart glasses, which "could also provide health insights, such as detecting dry eyes or monitoring posture", with a ten-foot pole; especially when there's also entirely passive bifocals and progressives.
India proposes requiring smartphone makers to share source code with the government and make several software changes as part of a raft of security measures.
How does that sound promising at all? Especially when initiated by a government, previously having attempted to enforce government spyware, to be installed on all consumer smartphones. The following excerpts are from India's proposed phone security rules that are worrying tech firms
Devices must store security audit logs, including app installations and login attempts, for 12 months.
Phones must periodically scan for malware and identify potentially harmful applications.
Defined to be potentially harmful by who? Right.
Phone makers must notify a government organisation before releasing any major updates or security patches.
We cannot approve of the security patch just yet, as we must first extensively exploit the vulnerability...
Devices must detect if phones have been rooted or "jailbroken", where users bypass built-in security restrictions, and display continuous warning banners to recommend corrective measures.
Phones must permanently block installation of older software versions, even if officially signed by the manufacturer, to prevent security downgrades.
It becomes more apparent to me everyday, we might be headed towards a society, dynamically managed by digital systems; a "smart society", or rather a Society-as-a-Service. This seems to be the logical conclusion, if you continue the line of "smart buildings" being part of "smart cities". With use of IoT sensors and unified digital platforms, data is continuously being gathered on the population, to be analyzed, and its extractions stored indefinitely (in pseudonymized form) by the many data centers, currently being constructed. This data is then used to dynamically adapt the system, to replace the "inefficient" democratic process and public services as a whole. Of course the open-source (too optimistic?) model used, is free of any bias; however nobody has access to the resources required to verify the claim. But given big-tech, historically never having shown any signs of tyranny, a utopian outcome can safely be assumed... Or I might simply just be a nut, with a brain making nonsensical connections, which have no basis in reality.
If open-source, a lot more eyes could be on it, and therefore the chances of intentionally implemented vulnerabilities, by Threema itself, would have a higher chance of being noticed before able to be exploited, by both hackers and Threema (partners).