sopuli.xyz

LemmyKnowsBest, to memes in You are wrong.

people who gravitate toward this written conversation-based social media with strangers we never want to meet, we just love to write, mmmkay?

cro_magnon_gilf,

Makes me wonder. Has there ever been a Lemmy meetup?

leave_it_blank, to memes in Take that YouTube

It’s funny. Before this crackdown none of my co-workers used adblockers. To install an add-on was too much hassle. They just watched the ads.

Now suddenly they became interested after hearing about them again, and almost all are running Firefox with ublock origin now.

YouTube should have just kept quiet, I don’t believe they are better off now more than before.

BeigeAgenda,
@BeigeAgenda@lemmy.ca avatar

Great, let the Streisand effect bite Google in the bum.

baascus,
@baascus@lemmy.world avatar

If Twitch taught us anything, this is just the beginning.

Vej,

What happened on twitch?

Nythos,

Made it more difficult to block ads than YouTube’s pathetic attempt.

bjoern_tantau,
@bjoern_tantau@swg-empire.de avatar

I was really surprised (and annoyed) to see some ads on Twitch yesterday.

Gormadt,
@Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

Straight up the first ads I’ve seen in a long time were on twitch.

Then of course the first ad I see was for Narcan followed by an ad for Smirnoff.

God I fucking hate ads

MonkderZweite,

Ads need to be clearly identifiable as such here.

ComradeWeebelo,

Twitch embeds ads directly into the stream now. They’re next to impossible to block now, though I’ve heard some people say it’s still possible.

TalkingCat,

Try ttv-lol-pro, it works for me.

CanadianCarl,

I will have to try that. My way of blocking twitch ads is using my vpn. But it disconnects me from chat for a few seconds, when an ad should appear.

can,
ramble81, to memes in Take that YouTube

This is a big reason Google wanted to push the whole “web integrity” thing. There would have been no way to use an adblocker after that and they would have won the blocking wars. It’s bad enough they’re gimping Chromium with Manifest v3, but they tried for it all.

only0218,

Welp They are still cooking it, for now only on android as to boil the frog slowly but it will come back.

glorious_albus, (edited )

Wait what are they doing on Android?

FrostyCaveman,

Adding attestation crap to WebView

takeda,

Adding that stuff to Android, so if you don’t have the genuine YouTube app the server won’t even serve you the videos. It is meant to kill things like ReVanced.

Kalkaline,
@Kalkaline@leminal.space avatar

YouTube works fine in Firefox on Android with ublock origin

takeda,

I was talked about AdNauseum. Unlike uBO it is not up to speed with YouTube changes.

only0218,

For now…

hh93, to memes in Take that YouTube

Or use adnauseam and fuck up their ad-tracking infrastructure beyond just blocking the ads

programmer_belch,
@programmer_belch@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

A miniscule amount of tomfoolery

Wxnzxn,
@Wxnzxn@lemmy.ml avatar

I actually had to get rid of adnauseam because YT detected it pretty consistently, ublock origin as of this comment still works fine on YT though.

takeda,

From what I understand AdNauseum is built on top of uBlockOrigin so you supposed use it instead. The thing is that it isn’t as frequently updated and due to recent YouTube wars this is currently required.

ElPussyKangaroo, to memes in Take that YouTube

YouTube won’t work with ublock on Vivaldi…

can,

Guess it time to switch to Firefox.

ElPussyKangaroo,

I can’t. I use fairly PWAs regularly and Firefox is NOT great with them.

13617,

What is a PWA?

radioactiveradio,

Progressive Web Apps. Basically websites but with icons on your desktop or app launcher.

SVcross,
@SVcross@lemmy.world avatar

Progressive Web Apps.

can,

Agreed. I use Firefoxfor my braising but I install my PWAs under Samsung internet.

ElPussyKangaroo,

Oof. Samsung Internet? Damn.

can,

I don’t use PWAs enough to warrant installing another browser for them.

ElPussyKangaroo,

Valid.

Smegh,

Gotta disable Vivaldi’s integrated Adblocker and use uBlock only, at least that’s what fixed it for me.

ElPussyKangaroo,

Worked for me as well. Thanks!

Zerush, (edited ) to memes in Take that YouTube
@Zerush@lemmy.ml avatar

uBO + iFrame script + Clickbait Remover + YouTube NonStop, the only way to clean up the YT crap and don’t want to or can use a front-end or desktop client.

newjunkcity,

Great suggestions.

I’d strongly recommend Dearrow instead of Clickbait remover now (I used to use Clickbait).

It’s made by the same developer who made Sponsorblock, which I also strongly recommend (it skips over in-video sponsors, title sequences, non-music sections in music videos, etc.). Just remember to turn it off for channels whom you wish to support.

Norgur, to memes in Perfectly balanced, as all things should be.

Am I the only one not getting that reference? Whatever it is: is it mainstream enough for the Memes community? (I mean... it could be, not the first time I'm out of the loop)

InfiniWheel,

Granted I haven’t seen it yet, but its a recent popular anime about an elf, set years after she and her party defeated the demon king. Also seems to explore her relationship with humanity given they age, grow old and die in whats a short period of time to her since she’s an elf.

IkarusHagen2,
@IkarusHagen2@feddit.de avatar

Depression. Well, if only there was a community for that

Zink,
@Zink@pawb.social avatar

…do we tell him?

Sabata11792,
@Sabata11792@kbin.social avatar

It's a relatable anime girl, and a high population of weebs.

Enkers, (edited )

It’s from Frieren, a currently airing anime about an elf girl who’s as bad at making friends as most of us weebs.

Droptherock, to memes in Take that YouTube

I noticed that the Behind The Overlay extension in Firefox can also defeat the YouTube ad blocker pop up.

shortwavesurfer, to privacy in A question about secure chats

Technically, yes, it is encrypted. However, Facebook still gets metadata on who you talk to, when you talk to them, how long you talk to them, your contact information, etc. As an example, if you talked to your girlfriend, then you talked to her doctor, and then you talked to your mom. There’s a good chance that your girlfriend may be pregnant, even if I did not know what was said. Or, if I know you are at the top of a bridge and that you contacted a suicide hotline… So just because it is encrypted does not mean it is safe.

remotelove,
@remotelove@lemmy.ca avatar

That’s clever about the pregnancy.

I would have thought it was about a case of herpes that you caught from your girlfriend and then gave to your mom.

nightwatch_admin, (edited )

And that’s why privacy is important - the assumptions and decisions an algorithm makes are not necessarily correct, often not even close.

Edit:before someone wants to be smart: yes, I know it’s a joke.

PupBiru,
@PupBiru@kbin.social avatar

ml doesn’t understand jokes very well, so honestly it’s not a shit example lol

shortwavesurfer,

This made me laugh. Thanks

poVoq,
@poVoq@slrpnk.net avatar

Also WhatsApp requests access to the phone book and is very hard to use if you deny access. This is very likely done because Facebook wants access to the stored numbers to build a social graph. Even if you personally don’t mind, it is a gross privacy violation to share the phone number of other people with Facebook.

DudeDudenson,

Question, how would you use a messaging app that identifies users trough phone numbers without giving it access to phone numbers?

poVoq, (edited )
@poVoq@slrpnk.net avatar

By typing in the numbers, or selectively sharing them from the address book. This works fine on Signal, Telegram and Threema. Only Whatsapp makes it so that you have to share your entire address book with the app.

With some workarounds you can actually use whatsapp also without giving it access to your address book, which shows that it is clearly an intentional dark pattern by Facebook to make people share their entire address book with them to avoid the hassle.

AVincentInSpace,

Well said. I’m saving this comment in case I need to explain this to someone else.

PupBiru, (edited )
@PupBiru@kbin.social avatar

the other important thing with all of this is that even if your girlfriend is taking care, THEY STILL KNOW

people around you (or “you”, in this case) using these services impacts your privacy

is there anything we can do about that? probably not

but it’s worth being aware of

otter, (edited ) to privacy in A question about secure chats

My understanding is that it IS encrypted, and its supposed to use the Signal protocol (Signal developed it and released it for others to use)

The problems are with

  • metadata (like the other comment explained)
  • closed source, so we take their word on it for how it works. It’s possible they’re being misleading or doing something shady

See this image from a few years ago: https://i.redd.it/0imry50rxy961.png

Note that signal does require this, which isn’t in the chart:

  • phone number (for now)
  • last active date
  • sign up date (I think)
pylapp,
@pylapp@programming.dev avatar

Interesting! Do you remember where you got this chart?

elvith,

These are just screenshots of the data privacy section from the Apple AppStore of each of the apps. Afaik those are mandatory & self reported by the devs of the app.

otter, (edited )

I think it’s from here :)

forbes.com/…/whatsapp-beaten-by-apples-new-imessa…

Also it does leave out some info, I edited my comment up top

ultratiem,
@ultratiem@lemmy.ca avatar

iMessage definitely has more hooks in than those listed. It’s an integral Apple service that’s hooked into your deeper iCloud account. And because of that, they know a lot more than just a mere “chat” app would get access to. Which likely makes it harder to quantify.

Moreover, Meta and Alphabet also cross reference a lot of data points from all the other sources they have (cookies, IP logs, etc.). Again making actual data points fuzzy or incomplete.

Agent641, (edited )

I do not consent to Signal knowing about my empty box

otter, (edited )

Oh also @Thisfox

Instead of Telegram, consider one of these, it’s easier to switch to the good one now than to try and switch again later.

www.privacyguides.org/en/real-time-communication

Signal works great for my family

Thisfox, (edited )

I have been using Telegram for… A really long time. A decade? Maybe not that long. But yeah, no reason to change from what works for me. You’re right about that.

Signal and Matrix(?) and the others all seem to be a recent development, and although I have downloaded a few, no one else has them or has heard of them, so their directories are empty as I have never found anyone who wants to connect that way. It means I don’t know how to use or teach older people how to use the software. I am trying to find a simple evidence-based way to encourage my family to change their minds, but it appears it will only make me look paranoid, so probably won’t try.

otter, (edited )

That’s fair enough, it’s really location based. Around where I am, telegram isn’t that popular. I’ve met a few people using Signal and I have friends/collegues pop up in the “____ has Signal” section of the app.

We don’t really have a dominant chat app around here, there’s a good mix of messenger/instagram/iMessage, with some groups sticking to Whatsapp/WeChat/Viber.

I am trying to find a simple evidence-based way to encourage my family to change their minds, but it appears it will only make me look paranoid

I think part of it is because it’s hard to convince people without first explaining how things work. Not much use in worrying about it if you can’t, just look out for yourself. What you COULD do is to use the private option when you need to talk about something sensitive. If the app is installed on their phone then they’re more likely to use it, and even if not then you’re looking out for yourself

pylapp, to privacy in A question about secure chats
@pylapp@programming.dev avatar

You can for example have a look on the online resource below:

www.securemessagingapps.com

It is very interesting with a big comparison grid between plenty of messaging solutions.

LWD, (edited ) to privacy in A question about secure chats

deleted_by_author

  • Loading...
  • theskyisfalling,

    Does it though when they control both ends. It is encrypted between each end which I guess secures against things like a man in the middle attack from outside parties but their app encrypts it on one end and decrypts it on the other. I have a very hard time believing that they don’t “read” your messages at some point in that process.

    PupBiru,
    @PupBiru@kbin.social avatar

    i’ve seen the bullet points from that article riffed in different ways, but i think that’s the most important part:

    • They know you rang a phone sex line at 2:24 am and spoke for 18 minutes. But they don't know what you talked about.
    • They know you called the suicide prevention hotline from the Golden Gate Bridge. But the topic of the call remains a secret.
    • They know you got an email from an HIV testing service, then called your doctor, then visited an HIV support group website in the same hour. But they don't know what was in the email or what you talked about on the phone.
    • They know you received an email from a digital rights activist group with the subject line “Let’s Tell Congress: Stop SESTA/FOSTA” and then called your elected representative immediately after. But the content of those communications remains safe from government intrusion.
    • They know you called a gynecologist, spoke for a half hour, and then called the local abortion clinic’s number later that day.
    Brtrnd,

    I’ve wondered if they don’t know the data. They can perfectly read the convo on your device, assign a category what you’re talking about and keeping that category. They don’t store, read, know the conversation, they only ‘analyze’ it. F.e. if you talk about planes they may assign a category travel and sell your profile to holiday companies?

    I don’t know about this, I’m just thinking that’s how I’d do it if I ran an evil corp.

    SpaceNoodle, to science_memes in Still researching algorithms? Got bad news, Rust now has all the algorithms

    … but they’re all “unsafe”

    Zeroxxx, to privacy in A question about secure chats
    @Zeroxxx@lemmy.my.id avatar

    You and family use WhatsApp to talk to each others, just like millions families out there and so far no chats have been leaked because the encryption is bypassed.

    You make your own life so complicated for what?

    otter,

    This is the privacy community, and they were discussing the privacy aspect.

    The concern isn’t about getting your chats leaked, there’s no incentive to just give away data that is collected. The concern is usually about a malicious group (company, government, criminals) abusing the data that they can get their hands on.

    Zeroxxx, (edited )
    @Zeroxxx@lemmy.my.id avatar

    He is talking about encryption, which I addressed. Maybe reading comprehension, eh?

    Konlanx,

    “It must be encrypted well because nothing has been leaked yet” is a very, very bad stance on encryption.

    In fact, every encryption is working well until it’s broken the first time.

    So no, you didn’t address shit.

    Zeroxxx, (edited )
    @Zeroxxx@lemmy.my.id avatar

    Yea yea, if even Signal Protocol cant do shit, your shit can’t do anything as well. 🤣

    All you guys do is talking without any solid base. Sigh.

    Konlanx,

    That comment does not make sense.

    Zeroxxx,
    @Zeroxxx@lemmy.my.id avatar

    If you lack knowledge , admit it.

    WhatsApp is using Signal Protocol.

    sag,

    Bro are you high or something?

    Konlanx, (edited )

    It is very unpleasant to communicate with you.

    It is still unclear what you meant with “your shit”.

    Apart from that I did not argue against the signal protocol, I argued against your idiotic stance on encryption.

    Maybe reading comprehension, eh?

    Zeroxxx,
    @Zeroxxx@lemmy.my.id avatar

    So? We just have differing view. No more, no less.

    Bring your shit elsewhere don’t present it to me.

    Konlanx,

    Are you able to coherently answer or is it going to stay like this? Because then I will end this conversation here.

    Zeroxxx, (edited )
    @Zeroxxx@lemmy.my.id avatar

    End it. I don’t need to converse with you either, I merely answered OP.

    Since you ended this, be quiet and don’t spam me with notification.

    velox_vulnus, (edited )

    It’s a rage-bait, avoid trolls like them. Whatsapp is close-sourced - so we don’t know shit about how good their encryption is - remember how phone numbers were showing up on Google Search? Yeah. Meta also works with the local government to suppress “fake news” - so, how exactly does it know what the contents are, without breaking encryption? These are two of the most convincing reason to not use the app.

    nick,

    Give it up, you sound like either a you don’t know what you’re talking about or a you’re a bootlicker for facebook.

    You’re never going to win a pro Facebook argument in this community.

    otter,

    Wider context matters

    Two companies can advertise lockers with the same high quality lock, but one might still be better to use

    • if one company can’t prove they are actually using the high quality lock
    • if one company acts as a middleman, doing the locking/unlocking for you
    • if one company watches everything you do before and after using the locker, allowing them to infer what you are using it for

    Even if we specifically talk about security, one is better than the other.

    Zeroxxx,
    @Zeroxxx@lemmy.my.id avatar

    WhatsApp has been endorsed by Moxie himself who invented Signal Protocol. What more do you want? Long winded talk for shit?

    otter,

    Long winded talk for shit?

    what

    PupBiru,
    @PupBiru@kbin.social avatar

    i can’t find a single reference to that. i think you’re confused

    fiat_lux, (edited ) to privacy in A question about secure chats

    To be frank with you, humans are the weakest security point in any system. Even if you did somehow (impossibly) 100% secure your device... you’re literally sending everything to X other family members who don't care about security anyway and take zero preventative measures. That's sort of the point of a chat app. All they would need to do is target your family instead of you to get the exact same info - this is how Facebook has everyone's telephone number and profile photo, even if they don't have an account. And if it's a WhatsApp data breach... well. Your family is just one in a sea of millions of potentially better/easier targets.

    If there's anything interesting about your family chats that is actually secret info, it probably shouldn't be put into text anywhere except maybe a password manager. Just tell them not to send passwords or illegal stuff or security question info via whatsapp. It's all you can realistically do in situations like this.

    We literally cannot keep all information private from everyone all the time, you have to pick and choose your battles. And even then, you'll still lose some, even if you're perfect.

    Zak,
    @Zak@lemmy.world avatar

    That’s true in the sense that if a very sophisticated organization directly targets your family chat for surveillance, they’re going to find a way to access its content no matter what communication method you use.

    Threat modeling is core to security, and that kind of threat probably isn’t the issue here. Mass surveillance, both government and corporate is, and neither is likely to secretly install malware on a family-members phone that can access the contents of the group chat. Doing that to large numbers of people would get them caught; they save it for valuable targets.

    Governments openly forcing the install of spyware, as I’ve read China does in some cases would be an exception; you cannot have a secure conversation involving a device so compromised.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • localhost
  • All magazines
  • Loading…
    Loading the web debug toolbar…
    Attempt #

    Fatal error: Allowed memory size of 134217728 bytes exhausted (tried to allocate 18878464 bytes) in /var/www/kbin/kbin/vendor/symfony/http-kernel/Profiler/FileProfilerStorage.php on line 171

    Fatal error: Allowed memory size of 134217728 bytes exhausted (tried to allocate 4210688 bytes) in /var/www/kbin/kbin/vendor/symfony/error-handler/Resources/views/logs.html.php on line 25