this post was submitted on 29 Feb 2024
1324 points (96.8% liked)

Privacy

31799 readers
137 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

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 150 points 8 months ago (7 children)
[–] vikingqueef@lemmy.world 92 points 8 months ago (3 children)

the whole plan is to get him over here and then kill him or let him die of neglect.

[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 62 points 8 months ago (5 children)

May as well get in early.

Julian Assange didn't kill himself.

[–] Chakravanti@sh.itjust.works 7 points 8 months ago

A lot like Gary Webb.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] davel@lemmy.ml 19 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I suspect they’d prefer that he die in prison over there, but if not then in prison over here. I don’t think they want to ever take this to trial, because it’s been a farce from the start.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 33 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

They literally dropped all the potentially credible charges they were first going for. Those women in Sweden? Long gone, as of 5 years ago. Hillary Clinton's emails? Also dropped.

What really sucks is that the narrative has changed over years, as the facts have been forgotten. People think he's been in league with Russia, and some even think Russia provided him with evidence against Republicans alongside the Democrat emails, and that he refused to publish the Republican stuff in support of Russia so that Russia's man (Trump) could get in the White House.

First off, Russia wouldn't provide Republican emails if they were trying to get a Republican inside the White House (they didn't provide any such emails and they did promote Trump). Second, the controversy as about Wikileaks not publishing details of Russian corruption. While this is definitely controversial (and frankly something I disagree with), Wikileaks' reasoning was simply: "Russian corruption is not news, it is to be expected".

[–] poVoq@slrpnk.net 20 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Those two women from Sweden were not prostitutes (and even if, it wouldn't matter) and have themselves backtracked from pressing charges. They are also victims of this entire farce and have been instrumentalized.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 9 points 8 months ago

Fair point, I meant to change that before I posted. I think I was getting confused with Trump and the prostitutes that peed on him.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] muntedcrocodile@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Does the uk not have a law against executions and if so would the not be breaking said law by extraditing him.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 23 points 8 months ago (1 children)

That's exactly what they're arguing here. However the US is trying to use a non-answer to avoid this, and in the past that's worked.

[–] muntedcrocodile@lemmy.world 11 points 8 months ago

Well doesnt that just fill you with confidence.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] nikscha@feddit.de 123 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Everytime someone says they don't have anything to hide I ask them what the pin of their phone is and to give me their phone. Suddenly that's something different...

[–] Charger8232@lemmy.ml 78 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I once asked a friend if he trusted the lock on his phone (brand new iPhone 15 Pro Max, latest and greatest). He told me he did. I asked him if I could use his phone while it was locked, and he told me "No, I don't trust you. You would probably hack it or something." That statement says two things:

  1. He only cares about attacks on privacy on a personal level, which is the mental flaw lots of people have.

  2. He doesn't actually trust the lock on his phone, but refuses to admit it.

By the way, here's a few fun gimmicks you can pull on iPhone users:

  1. See if you can swipe left to view widgets on the lock screen. I was able to get someone's address this way. He told me the whole time "There's nothing you can find there." and then afterwards said "Ah, crap."

  2. If there is a lock screen mini widget (under the time) for a clock or related feature, tap on it and it will open the clock app. You can also get there if you can swipe down to access control center if the "timer" button is enabled there. You can then make it look like you unlocked their phone, and start reading off their alarm names. This one has freaked out a lot of people.

  3. If they realize how you got there and try disabling control center access on the lock screen (as they should, FaceID is fast enough people!), you can see if you can access Siri and say "View my alarms".

[–] Eggyhead@kbin.social 43 points 8 months ago

I can see why your friend would assume you could hack their phone based on how specific these steps are.

[–] pineapplelover@lemm.ee 29 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Me: graphene phone with notifications hidden until unlocked. No voice assistant whatsoever. I guess the only thing you can do is take pictures from lock screen but that's not really useful. It doesn't show gallery of previous photos.

[–] cows_are_underrated@feddit.de 11 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Even default android has such settings. I can view what song I'm listening to, take new photos and theoretically take short notes(haven't figured out how it works) and that's it. Also since I disabled the Google assistant, they can't do anything with it too.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] storcholus@feddit.de 13 points 8 months ago (3 children)

There is a difference between having nothing to hide and not closing the door when talking a shit

[–] nikscha@feddit.de 27 points 8 months ago

What I'm hearing is that people have an inert desire for privacy, EVEN if they don't have anything to hide (what are you hiding in the toilet?) I don't see why that wouldn't extend into the digital realm....

[–] Gabu@lemmy.ml 14 points 8 months ago

And what is it?

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago

A right to privacy? Not in my country, thank you very much.

The government has every right to watch you take a shit and if you don't acknowledge that then you must be conspiring to deprive us of our freedoms.

[–] nolight@lemm.ee 80 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Say whatever you want, Snowden's a fucking hero for sharing this.

[–] n3m37h@lemmy.dbzer0.com 37 points 8 months ago

Don't forget the people that tried to blow the whistle on the NSA prior to Snowden

[–] Sims@lemmy.ml 49 points 8 months ago (11 children)

A 'State' is not inherently bad. That's just libertarian propaganda/dogma. Self-interested psychopaths in charge of a state is bad..

[–] 9point6@lemmy.world 46 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Funny thing about ancap libertarianism is that they've correctly identified that power can lead to tyranny, but they're completely oblivious to the power that corporatism (the conclusion of lassez-faire capitalism) results in.

[–] InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world 13 points 8 months ago

They often are Christians, so they apply fundamentalist style thinking and cannot challenge the assumptions they made.

[–] TengoDosVacas@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

tHe mArKeT wIlL rEgUlAtE tHeM

[–] djehuti@programming.dev 23 points 8 months ago (7 children)

States always wind up being run by self-interested psychopaths.

That's not a "flaw;" it's the fundamental nature of the concept.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] delirious_owl@discuss.online 16 points 8 months ago

Lol lots of people think that no entity has the right to monopolize violence against a population.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 13 points 8 months ago

Unfortunately it's usually self-interested psychopaths who seek out and obtain those positions, especially since you need to be a bit psychotic to do what's required to get there.

[–] winterayars@sh.itjust.works 12 points 8 months ago (3 children)

The state is kinda bad and it's not only Right-Libertarians who say that. Even so, leaking documents is not always bad. Like, the Abu Ghraib leak was objectively good.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Oh boy, here comes the political drama. Can we not do this?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] phreekno@lemmy.world 41 points 8 months ago

Man I really do enjoy reading the classifieds

[–] far_university1990@feddit.de 28 points 8 months ago

Warthunder forum be like

[–] Wahots@pawb.social 27 points 8 months ago (1 children)

This argument of "nothing to hide" always reminds me of Google, show me this man's balls, please by Eric Andre.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 22 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Putin Alert! Putin Alert! This guy supports Vladimir Putin! He is undermining the US so that the Russians can invade! Also, the Chinese! Also the... uh... Cubans? Venezuelans? Quebecians? Idk, but its bad! They're coming to take your freedom! Protect the NSA! PROTECT THE NSA! THEY STAND BETWEEN YOU AND TYRANNY!

[–] fahfahfahfah@lemmy.billiam.net 12 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Inb4 some Quebec person comes in and complains about “Quebecians”

[–] vikingqueef@lemmy.world 13 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Phonecians are from phoenix.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] andreas@lemmy.korfmann.xyz 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jerrythegenius@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago

*grabs popcorn*

[–] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 10 points 8 months ago

Nothing to hide...

It's the same reason I don't support free speach: I've got nothing to say.

/s

[–] battleshack@sh.itjust.works 8 points 8 months ago

BUT BUT BUT THOSE ARE ILLEGAL TO SHARE

[–] Licksrocks@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

Bruh it's the government. They have plenty of things to hide.

[–] deweydecibel@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

I mean...the state does have legitimate things to hide beyond their spying programs. Not every person that spills government secrets is as careful as Snowden.

load more comments
view more: next ›