I didn't lost confidence in Windows 7 nor Windows 10. What I lost was only the last completely irrational hope that commercial systems could ever be as open and private with the end-user as non-commercial. Microsoft (among other corporations in this field) is a major player. Their products are as the vision of Microsoft is - useful, productive, synced, always available (and profitable). They just aren't made for privacy. Because privacy (or software builded with privacy in mind) isn't profitable - it requires some fundamental code change. Yes, that's absolutely something that Microsoft should do, but the financial-headed interest won't make this happen. Honestly, how many of non-business Windows users had bought Windows (and/or Office) out of privacy? I really hardly doubt that anyone. Many, if not all, bought Windows, because it's known. Because our favorite apps are running only on Windows. Because I have all the files and mails synced and available wherever I am in the world. Because it cares about all the things, so I don't need to. Because I've seen a friend, a helper - something that will make my life easier. And not out of privacy. We just clicked "I agree to the EULA, ToS and PP", rarely to read any paragraph and thinking about consequences of the legal stuff we accepted. And if now the time has come (out of whatever reason) - we can always leave those Terms and Policies behind - the problem is that maybe we just won't get that what we got in Windows. Maybe we don't have the time, the interest, the power, the concentration to afford a change in our daily life habits. It's just easier the say "Meh. I don't like it. Honestly it's against what I'm standing for - but.. I like the comfort". And that's OK - as long as we don't present it as an issue. It's not a legitimate reason to feel offended by something that actually is written in those law papers we accepted by using the "issue". I'm not saying that Microsoft behavior is good for freedom or privacy - it absolutely isn't. But it's up to us how we'll react to that. And Linux is always a possibility.
One example is to escape censorship of repressed regimes, where accessing independent media or free speech publishing is difficult and also dangerous. Also an escape from mass surveillance could be the motivation for using VPNs and/or TOR.
I agree with this point. I have no worries about my (or other) governments spying at me but there is that uncomfortable feeling of being continuously observed (even when doing everything lawful and moral). In general people don't like to be under continuous surveillance, even if they aren't doing anything false (in moral and jurisdictional context) There's a quite known quote (or motto):
If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.
It's easy to say and pretty much easy to do. For the average user, the catalog of applications available is good enough - except you want to use some really complex/professional software. "Only Windows" application are mainly commercial, I guess? For Open Source/FOSS/Free Software there is absolutely no reason to be "only for Windows" + developing software is easier on Linux, as Windows has a different and closed-sourced architecture. This "only Windows" (for non-Microsft apps) hype has its roots in the facts, that Windows has monopole about OSes and because of that, it's not lucrative enough for a company to code complex (maybe paid) software for a minor user group - even if they do, mostly OS X comes before Linux. Also Windows hold an even stronger monopole speaking of working-environments in businesses - Yes, for most employees it's not an option to switch to another OS, as software they must work with is supported only on Windows. Nevertheless, some average employee doesn't have even the choice to decide about using Windows or not - if Windows (OEM) is on the working computer, than Windows will be on the working computer, privacy issues up or down - except for those paranoid corporations with ultra-secret business secrets - only there the change is needed (although why would they use Windows in first place - even XP, Vista, 7, 8, 8.1 tracked some statistical data and had the possibility to catch some more). But this doesn't mean that an average person at his/her home with his/her PC cannot switch to Linux/BSD - yes, it requires some time to get in with something other than Windows but it's certainly possible and an option. For most people, it's not an option.
Speaking of it - there is never a 100% in IT.
In my opinion - forget about privacy when using commercial products. For sure, you can "disable" the ad-tracking-ID in Settings but the big question is: "Does it really helps?" Nope. It doesn't. Turning privacy intruding settings to "off" is merely giving a false sense of security - "I turned it off, and because I trust Microsoft and - more importantly - I accepted those Privacy Policy and Terms of Service, it's logically for me, that it is disabled." If you distrust Microsoft and it's ToS or Privacy Policy are presenting an issue to you - go for a Linux distro. The possibility that something there is backdoored, spying, etc. is practically seen much lower than by commercial operating systems, like OS X and Windows, as it's Open Source (although this doesn't make it bullet-proof or perfect). But of course, you just won't get that comfort as by using Windows 10. You can't get 100% privacy and 100% comfort. Choose the percentage that suits you. Although sometimes there is a limit for privacy.
Nope. Not directly. Something like "complete privacy" or "invisibility" does not exist. First of all, TOR (used in Tails) doesn't make you anonymous. It's not designed to do something like that. It's generally meant to be a tool for have a chance in repressed regimes. Secondly, you must have an apparently very strong motivation to stay close to a public WiFi all the time. Third, VPNs are logging. Even if they are saying that they are not. Just because of paying approximately 7$/month, do you really think a VPN service provider will assume legal responsibility for all your also illegal actions done by their system? I think not. Because it's not even near lucrative to get trouble with the law, get prosecuted, because somebody was doing bad things online. No one would do that in my opinion. Fourth, by paying for Socks5 or a VPN provider, there exist transaction logs. Even if your are using Bitcoin, it can (if there is enough interest) tracked back to you. Fifth, getting a throwaway laptop is 1) expensive and 2) has the really high risk to get a hardware backdoored machine - the only option is then to buy a 6-8 years old computer to be sure. At the end, it can be extremely expensive (time and money) to get close to something like "complete" anonymity. And the point is that it just not work - the government you are trying hide from has far more resources to exploit systems and establish a mass surveillance.
The bubble of the Internet Dream just burst... Or did it a long time ago? That's the question we're obligated to ask us. Internet isn't a "space". It's a concept, that defines a pretty complex physical environment, consisting of communication protocols, used by an extreme number of people over the world. And because of some individuals, who are playing by some "different" moral and ethics codex, it's far from being "safe". And I'm not talking about hacktivists. Not "space", Cameron, "knowledge" would be a better word that you should had used. Hiding the truth could be far more effective. It seems to function anyway. It's absurd.He [Cameron] said terrorists, paedophiles and criminals must not be allowed a “safe space” online.
In 20 years, the Web might complete its shift from liberator to oppressor. It’s up to us to prevent that.
Yup, the problem that average people (so average privacy concerned - like "I don't like that Facebook knows where I'm going Tuesday night but don't care that much, that I would make a change in my habits") - won't change their daily, weekly, monthly habits/life in general because of this. It's too comfortable that somebody would give up known comfort for something like "privacy" (which meaning is mostly unknown for him/her). Of course, a complete isolation of a workstation from any form of network is technically the "best" solution for privacy and security. Just, how many of Internet folks would give Internet completely up? It's a too drastic change in an average privacy concerned person life, that it would really make (short or long term) effect. We just have no real option - leave the censored, manipulated, monitored "Internet" behind and go for a run (BTW, it's also healthy), meet friends (or somebody else) in real life OR accept the mountains of ToS-es and don't comply.
Note: I know it's a typo and apologize for the following but I couldn't withstand the funny difference that one single char makes. Maybe it's also just me that finds it funny, so it's probably irrelevant and ininformative to any discussion, so again, sorry. Also I don't know why I'm even writing this now, as 90% of the comment is apologizing (I hope this is without any typo). Anyway, if I typed so much of being sorry for a single sentence, which probably also isn't as fun as it was designed to be, then it's some kind legit to press the Commeny button? I also look forward to title editing after publishing the post. I highly reccomend Rocky-like music before long plane fights.
I also never used Reddit (although there is an account existent with my username) or any other aggregator, so Hubski is my primar experience and I love it. Throwaway, in my opinion, is mostly desired/used by already existent users, who don't wanna be judged for the matter they posted/commented about.
We just should "not screw it up".
To answer the question: We don't know for sure. As far as I know there hasn't been a recent independent security audit of the software. Secondly, Tox will exists anyway, but its community seems to be pretty annoyed of problems going on behind the scenes. And also, I personally do not consider your choice as very secure, as it is closed-source (or prove move wrong?) EFF published a list of nearly all IM tools and listed up their security and privacy, so I would like there for a new instant messenger that suits my needs.
So light and clean... A unique idea with great potential. I hope I can integrate well here. Seems a very promising alternative to reddit.
And down and down it goes... I certainly won't say I kinda expected this to happen. Nope, I won't.DAOs? Where we're heading there are no DAOs.
Me too. Sideways, ETH is currently being sold (at least officially) via BTC. So a collapse of the BTC system, where we're heading since a longer period of time, would significantly impact Ethereum's use, development and deployment - and that isn't that good. Maybe we should create a new cryptocurrency - DAO makes it easy [[UPDATE: to lose your money]] ... Oh, DAO is ETH based, ETH is BTC based, it follows: all DAO-related currencies are BTC dependent in the current stage. Ethereum should become independent (if it wants to survive) but not take over the role of Bitcoin. It wasn't intended for it in the first place.
Thanks.
Haven't listened to high music in a while. Again keep up with great work! Sounds just perfect during me finishing all yearly work.
I would love an open-behind-the-scenes-source Hubski! Just found Pyski, wondered if I should fork it, but then I saw that the API prototype is down (hasn't been here for about a year or so); so when the API is up server-side, I'm ready to help with the client-side bindings :) Again all the respect for your work! Anyway, as a hobbyist cryptographer, may I ask if there is a plan/option to upgrade to SHA3 (Keccak) - I would like to see that feature, although I don't know much about Arc programming? Nevertheless, SHA2 is still treated as secure but with the slow rise of quantum giants, it wouldn't be anymore impossible to break it. Although it's a rather silly, paranoid idea, I know.
Love it. You earned a new fan. Keep going. :)
TrueCrypt is dead. Development was discontinued by mid-2014 and the original devs (as other security oriented people) are saying that the source is NOT secure as there are several severe code flaws, found in the second audit round. A promising successor to TrueCrypt is VeraCrypt as it fixes many vulnerabilities and security issues found in TrueCrypt. More to read here. It even got a PPA.
As I see it, it's more a PR gag than serious protection, mainly to improve their image after the more acute and serious problem, namely YouTube's ultimatum: grant us access to your videos for our paid premium services, or you get deleted altogether. I feel that the ultimate problem is ultimate of YouTube's and still barely someone bats an eye about it. At what are we watching when such things happen?
Windows are cooling my computer down. I think Tux will like it.
True. But real-life surveillance much more expensive than controlling Internet backbones, upstream, etc. Although the government has anyway de facto unlimited resources, so in a way, it doesn't really matter out of the privacy aspect - you're just more social with people around you (or maybe not), which can be better than chatting them but seeing them daily.
The link is dead.
I'm in. Where's the popcorn? The state of the internet and the developed protocols over the next 20 years is going to be fascinating to watch.
IDK, I like some other tag. BTW, good page. Thanks for the share.
I hardly doubt that any "free" file hosting solution is really that free and secure as it claims to be.
As far as I know, uBlock Origin fixes WebRTC leaks without problems (using it myself). Also, I preffer https://ipleak.net/ over https://privacytools.io if it comes to leaks. More simple, more info in my opinion. But it's for sure as good as https://prism-break.org