Secret Alt Account

  • 0 Posts
  • 30 Comments
Joined 6 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 29th, 2024

help-circle
  • i wonder if they are a honeypot too

    If you use a free tier VPN, which doesn’t allow torrenting, then connect tor to it, then connect another non-tor encrypted connection to that (such as a different VPN), if you torrent from the different VPN (an encrypted VPN stream that passes through Proton), they still detect torrenting. This suggests advanced DPI. What no log VPN needs DPI?

    They also have dark design elements including logs you have to turn off by default.

    Proton also does aggressive scanning of certain things users do and will shut down accounts based on that. The problem is what privacy focused company scans user stuff like that?

    They also log multiple browser metrics when signing up or at least access them, such as audio context fingerprints. Is that really important for the sign up process?

    It wasn’t bad they gave up info to jail an activist, it was bad they said in their marketing materials they couldnt and didnt do that.

    ProtonVPN also for many years never accepted Monero and their email didn’t as well. So they care about privacy, but won’t accept the privacy crypto? There wasn’t a rational explanation for it, unless they are a honeypot. There were third parties who could have accepted the funds. The whole thing was unusual. It was incredibly suspicious. If you care about privacy so much, why not accept Monero for your email services? This is the most damning part of this. If they are a honeypot, it makes sense, if they aren’t it’s a head scratcher.

    It could be a coincidence? Possibly? But probably it isn’t. Everyone who loves privacy loves XMR. They don’t like XMR. You know who hates XMR? Governments. And so if someone is saying “I love privacy” and has numerous complex programs released, but then says XMR is too hard to accept, it should indicate something is odd.


  • Oh my goodness, the stupidity is off the charts

    The fight is over whether Apple must officially break into their code in the normal way

    It doesn’t preclude a back door

    There could be a backdoor exploit program so people can acess the phones and see everything in them through the cellular modem in certain parts of the government.

    If other parts of the government were not privy to this, they could get into an argument in open court about breaking their “privacy” generally

    Do you think if there was a gag order the lawyer representing Apple would write “But wait, this is an irrelivant debate because there’s actually another backdoor exploit?”

    Some of these phines could have been in airplane mode also making 1 type of exploit not usable.

    You do not know what the fuck you are talking about at all.

    Do you think an attorney for Apple is going to go into a court and say “The secret court made us put a baxkdoor into this part of tge phone, so why are we even arguing about this?” Such a lawyer would be jailed. You are incredibly naive and your reasoning is mostly “but Apple said so”

    The code is closed source.



  • They don’t need to incur a benefit. If the government contacta their legal department with an order saying we need to talk to your developers in charge of iOS as part of a court order, they are required to do it and can face jail and fines if they don’t comply.

    If the government says “don’t say there’z an exploit” it’s not going to be disclosed in their policy and they will be protected for lying by omission if a court is requiring that.

    What is their motive? Avoiding contempt.

    Are you this naive about closed source code or the power of jails and fines to persuade people to lie? How would this threaten their business model? How would anyone know about the exploit given their code is closed source and law enforcement regularly use parallel construction? No one can audit the code. Do you know what closed aource code is or how a gag order works?




  • This view is incredibly naive. If a backdoor exploit was added by one group of developers who did the code for the cellular modem and network parts of the operating system, there would only be certain people aware on a need to know basis. You could have other ignorant law enforcement officers unaware of the exploit making demands in court as well as Apple’s legal department fighting requests and the exploit is still there. It is incredibly naive and frankly stupid to be believe that a lack of a leak about closed source code means probably an exploit like that doesn’t exist. Demanding proof with closed source code, gag orders, and large development teams, only some of whom could know about an exploit and gag order, is just not really being realistic.






  • Your writing style and intelligence remind me of someone I used to know…

    who I fell in love with. He was very verbally intelligent and had brown eyes. I still fantasize about fleeing nuclear war and accidentally bumping into him in another country in which he has fewer romantic options due to many people affected by the war. It’s sort of a warped fantasy on many levels.

    I’m nearly certain you aren’t him because of the motorcycle post. And you use Firefox and he used Macs. He probably uses Safari or whatever stupid closed-source browser comes with those systems. I never understood Macs. I should have just bought one and pretended to like it, but I doubt it would have reeled him in. I was naive back when I met him and a Windows user, so also incredibly stupid. Even if I had used Linux back when I met him, or morally caved and pretended to like Macs, he probably still wouldn’t have found me to be an appealing option, hence the fantasy of nuclear war and encountering him in a limited options situation. “I am so sad there are so few survivors from this terrible war,” I would lie, feigning dismay. (It’s a really fucked up fantasy.) You have a similar linguistic style as he did.

    In any case, your logic is sort of flawed because under a game theory perspective, my vote will not matter. I am not in a swing state. Game theory looks at things from a hyper-logical decision-tree and probabalistic perspective, and no matter what I do in this situation the outcome is the same. What you wrote sounded clever, but is technically wrong.

    If you mean Biden is the least cruel choice, I don’t know if you are right. Trump went to Wharton and likes tall buildings and avoiding large unneeded costs. (I’m bracing myself to be inundated with down-votes.) Trump does not show a lot of empathy to minorities, but he’s cheap. I could see him using diplomacy to end things more quickly than Biden through fake flattery, and even if there was a Potemkin village aspect to his negotiation that was ethically one-dimensional, results are results. At the same time, I don’t think Trump has any pesky mirror neurons to affect how he feels regarding suffering and death, so any success would be secondary to his self-absorption, which could still be effecacious.

    But I also believe Trump is in the pocket of Putin, which could make nuclear war less likely, although he would cede to every Putin demand. This of course would wreck my fantasy of having to flee nuclear war and bumping into the brown eyed guy I’m in love with in a strange country… For various extremely convoluted reasons, randomly calling him or emailing him may not be effective. Basically many romantic rivals would have to no longer exist as a result of some apocalyptic hellscape for me to have a chance. What would be dystopia to some would be my only chance… at victory.

    Ultimately I could never vote for Trump because of how he treats people. I don’t want to normalize trash culture, even rich white trash culture. I just don’t know if I would vote for Biden as a symbolic gesture. He’s great to trans people but his presidency is part of incredible cruelty and I am not sure I want to add my meaningless rubber stamp to what is going on, as though kindness to LGBT people offers some sort of political absolution for complex and unseen atrocities. I adhere to the political system as it exists with its corruption out of fear, not loyalty, and voting at all seems to be supporting something corrupt and rotten. I believe in democracy, but I can’t change the mind of everyone. In a different world in which I had ended up less lonely, I could have had the strength to change minds with words, but as it stands any voting just seems like complicity.