I mean, we are talking about the same weirdo who genuinely believed and tried to tell the world that one of his rockets blew up on the pad because his competitors had sent a sniper and sabotaged the launch. He is pathologically unable to recognize that his failures are not, in fact, external attacks.
3 Likes
It sounds ridiculous, but I think they are correct. Let’s imagine that frontrowcrew.com used a Google font. If that font is hosted on the Google font CDN, then every new visitor to frontrowcrew.com (that has a web browser with default settings) will make an HTTP request to Google’s font server. Even repeat visitors who had the font cached locally might end up making occasional requests to google to see if the font had been updated. That will let Google know that that IP address visited frontrowcrew.com at a particular time and date, which is a privacy concern.
If you want a site that respects the user’s privacy, don’t use custom fonts, or simply host them yourself.
But I think there is a larger concern here. And that is this doesn’t apply just to fonts. It applies to all hotlinked/embedded third party content. This forum lets users post embedded content from all kinds of third parties. The manner in which it does so involves caching the images and content on our server and S3 bucket, so that loading a thread does not generate a huge pile of third party requests.
But even that system is not perfect. We cache a YouTube thumbnail, but as soon as you click to play an embedded video that’s the end of that. I checked the dev console and I saw there are still some cases where there are third party requests to sites like twimg (Twitter), bandcamp, etc.
If you want to fully respect privacy of the users you need first host everything yourself and abide by your own privacy policy. That means no sharing of user data on the backend side of things. Then on top of that you need to block all third party requests in your client side application and require users to specifically permit their info to be shared with each one individually.
Maybe there is a future where users accept or deny privacy policies on a domain by domain basis. And then if you happen to be on frontrowcrew.com, but there’s a YouTube embed, and you’ve already accepted or denied YouTube’s privacy policy, that gets taken into account and requests to YouTube are blocked unless the user takes specific action.
1 Like
I use uMatrix, and it blocks all 3rd party sites by default.
It’s a pain at first, but in general I prefer it more than the alternative.
https://www.engadget.com/cameo-steven-galanis-crypto-colonialism-140038311.html?src=rss
Truly tone deaf; I’d expect nothing less from a tech bro.
The worst part is they’re not tone deaf so much as this is the actual song.
They literally want to be the colonizers/robber barons of this new world. They want to be the Rockefellers of the 21st century. They want to start their dynasties.
This shit is stupid even if it works.
Thankfully, it doesn’t even work.
A collection of every false claim and generally stupid take Elon Musk has ever Tweeted.
1 Like
Instead of a 70% cut of revenue, streamers will now get 50%.
Also, more ads. Yay!
Devin Nash did a video on the business whys
There are rumors that while decreasing the payouts they might remove the exclusivity clause for affiliates and partners. If so, I believe this will lead to a huge boom in people simul-streaming to YouTube and other places.
Laughing my ass off at this “invention”.
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1534927184091029504
I’m sorry but the way I am, I would absolutely install one of those if I could. A magic suck hole in the corner of the bedroom would definitely be a quality of life upgrade. I guess whether it’s for laundry or some other connotation.
Of course just a generic laundry chute might also work if the architecture allows it. Also does this thing have like, anti-cat detector or something?
1 Like