European. Liberal. Insufferable fundamentalist green. I never downvote opinions: jeering at people is poor form. Comments with insulting language, or snark, or gotchas, or other effort-free content, will simply be ignored.
Important clarification: it’s much more than this. HarmonyOS is not any more a skin or a version of Android. It’s its own OS.
HarmonyOS is IMO going to do to Android what BYD has done to Tesla and VW. This is another chapter in China declaring independence from the West.
Translation for those not completely up to speed with the stakes of all this?
Your argument seems a bit redundant then. Journalists and news platforms are already “held accountable” when they get things wrong: their reputations suffer.
Assuming you mean laws (which is what you seem to be insinuating without daring to say it), this is an absolutely terrible take.
Laws to make journalism “accountable” are at the top of every authoritarian government’s wishlist. In Russia, you get 15 years for publishing “knowingly false information” about the armed forces (where the meaning of “false” is decided by the prosecutor). Since Trump debased this concept of “fake news”, authoritarian regimes around the world have used it as a pretext for new laws.
In China, meanwhile, journalists are not even allowed to “undermine national harmony” and similar nebulous ideals. Even in Britain, the libel laws are so tough that it can be very expensive to make even a small mistake when talking about individual rich people. The Trump administration is pushing for a British-style libel laws in the US.
The end result of making journalism “accountable” is to shut up all opposition to power. That is a very dangerous road to go down.
It’s an attractive vision. And yes, it’s probably even technically possible, the BitTorrent algorithm was designed for exactly this purpose.
That’s fair but I think you’re both worrying a bit too much. Astroturfing is a problem, sure, but it’s a first-world problem compared to spyware-driven engagement-maximization algorithms.
Yep but important to note here that decentralized social media based on video is always going to be a challenge because of the hosting and bandwidth costs of video.
Not really. It’s mainly because the site belong to idealists and hosting is cheap because it’s text.
Much harder to pull off algorithmic ad tech when it’s genuinely decentralized. And if it happens here I’ll be gone and I won’t the only one.
The major benefit of distributed social media comes from one thing: no ads.
It’s the ad-supported business model that creates terrible incentives:
Virtual socializing does carry drawbacks, as you say. Particularly the problem of group bias reinforcement, i.e. echo chambers and bubbles. But the really bad externalities of modern corporate social media can be traced to one thing IMO: advertising.
Isn’t this like saying “What phone numbers do you have in your address book?”
This is exactly how I do things too.
It’s all in the backend of Twilio
Yes, Twilio. There may be other providers but this is the market leader. I have rented a number for years for this purpose. In their interface you can plug a script into the number to redirect all SMS messages to an email address. No need for any physical phone or SIM. I am always mystified that so few other people do what I am doing.
2 USD a month for a European mobile number. Canada may be different but for many countries you will need to submit documentation to prove identity and your right of residence there.
Last time I looked there was nothing under 5 USD
with javascript and cookies turned off
My threat model isn’t the tightest
If that’s not tight, I hardly know what is. The modern web is all but unusable without JS.
So, what I’m reading here is that tab groups are better than privacy.
As others have hinted, there’s a tension here. Confiscating big tech’s access to your email is a major privacy win. But putting your actual name in your email address is… not so much. At the very least you won’t even have the option to obscure your identity from a correspondent. If you have a website at that domain, it too will be chained to your email identity, thus telling your correspondent all about you.
These realizations led me, personally, to ditch my whole setup of own-domain email. If the domain is going to be a pseudonym, might as well save some money and just use a pseudonymous handle at the email provider’s domain. That’s what I now do - with one of the privacy-respecting email hosts, of course.
Then it’s a hassle to change host later, you say? Yes, a little, but here arises another paradox: from the perspective of privacy, it’s actually an advantage to changing one’s email address from time to time.
Yes, that’s my thinking. For now it’s acceptable.
Even “babbling rants” are easy to read if you just Capitalize. The. Sentences.