atrielienz

@atrielienz@lemmy.world

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. For a complete list of posts, browse on the original instance.

atrielienz , (edited )

Isn't there a new 9th planet we can't see yet but we have detected because of it's gravitational pull on things around it?

https://science.nasa.gov/solar-system/planet-x/

I guess it's still a theory.

How do you store your grounded coffee? ( slrpnk.net )

Hiya, just quickly wondering how people store their coffee? Mine is in a tin box I got second hand, cos I thought it looked nice. Any rules regarding storing grounded coffee? I don't store much at the time, it's just if I grind a little too much and what not. I'm assuming the general thumb rule for this is to store it in a...

atrielienz ,

I have literally a couple of mason jars (the smaller variant ball jars). I have a hand grinder that fits the jars so it works out. Means my husband and I can both have ground coffee fairly fresh and without having to share (his coffee tastes like dirt to me). It works for us. We grind the night before usually.

atrielienz , (edited )

I was actually helping an aging coworker who wears a hearing aid set up some features on his phone and connecting his phone to Bluetooth. I was significantly disappointed with the lack of features geared toward those who are hard of hearing. Specifically in driving mode for Android auto. He's got a newish phone (S23) so it's not that. And the settings were far too convoluted to find for my tastes.

It really bothered me quite a bit that I couldn't make the Bluetooth register that he was using a car and therefore speakers, not headphones. And further that the settings for voice prompts in the maps app requires he go into his personal Google settings to change toggles because the app user facing one is only available once you pick a destination and he couldn't hear it.

Is it too much to ask for a long press shortcut?

atrielienz ,

So it has support for hearing aids. But nothing for the automotive side of things in that regard for the hard of hearing. His phone was connected to the car via Bluetooth. But no sound was coming from the cars speakers, and that sound was not transmitted to his hearing aid.

The onscreen toggle setting for Google maps does not show up until you select to navigate to a destination (this was a problem, because at first we couldn't even see if it was toggled on). Picking a destination and choosing to start navigation made that toggle show up, and it was toggled on but we still had no sound.

There's a settings toggle at the bottom of his screen (mine is not the same, I checked that both apps are updated to the latest firmware), and that settings menu has toggles for things like assistant voice/smart features related to the app, but no sound features. To get to the advanced sound features for the app you have to select your profile from the menu, then select settings, then select Navigation settings, and only then can you select things like "mute state", or "guidance volume".

Specifically things like "play voice over Bluetooth" which was not selected by default after his last update. This is not a setting he even knew existed or knew how to find. So I honestly doubt he deselected it.

My pixel 8 has accessibility features that allow for quick toggles. To control things like screen brightness and volume. It also has more settings for the hard of hearing than his. His S23 has the support for hearing aids but not things like sound amplifier that I was looking for. And audio adjustment which would have been useful to allow him to rebalance the sound for the ear that doesn't use a hearing aid. I actually wonder if that's a developer settings thing and why it should be hidden that way.

I also couldn't select what type of Bluetooth device he was using (but this may be because of the make and model of his car, not a shortcoming of Google or Android).

For him I'm sure this was very confusing because it seemed convoluted even to me. Anyway in the long run, we got voice prompts for navigation up and running, and he was happy with that. But the bar for entry for the hearing impaired seems a bit high.

atrielienz ,

How do you tag them?

atrielienz ,

Thank you.

atrielienz ,

I'm up. Neighbors decided to have a fight in the echo-y ass hallway at 2 am.

atrielienz , (edited )

Wouldn't be so bad if the hallway were properly sound deadened. But unfortunately even small sounds echo there. But yeah. Guess I'm less two hours of sleep today. Have a good day at work.

I like the username.

atrielienz ,

Motor vehicles are exempt and the law doesn't affect anything until 2025.

atrielienz ,

I do for things like ECUs that are programmed to the vin to prevent theft or tampering that would allow an attack vector for the vehicle.

atrielienz ,

They're right though. The security in newer cars and anti-theft features require that a couple of different modules talk to and validate each other. That's how it's designed to work to prevent theft or hacking. When your ECU talks to your keyless entry module or what have you they perform a handshake. That ECU and keyless entry module talk to the vehicle's starting system to validate that yes the correct key at the correct range is being used to send the signal to start the vehicle.

atrielienz ,

Define more secure. More secure than what? A non-keyless entry car of the same year and model? A car from ten years ago that doesn't have parts and modules that do a handshake and will immobilize the vehicle if the system is tampered with?

atrielienz , (edited )

It isn't just one module. That's what I'm trying to tell you. There's a handshake. So replacing the Electronics control module or the Powertrain control module those modules have to be configured to the Vin. In my mother's escape the PCM is in the wheel well behind a liner held in by plastic clips. None of those parts can be replaced without being configured to the VIN.

As for poorly designed cars, yeah. They've been making them for years and security has been evolving. Doesn't mean we should set ourselves back in that arena because Joe wants to swap out his PCM with one from the junk yard.

CAN network injection can be achieved through the headlight well on some cars.

https://www.autoblog.com/2023/04/18/vehicle-headlight-can-bus-injection-theft-method-update/

atrielienz , (edited )

According to the diagram I'm looking at? The front door handle receives the entry signal from the key that's in proximity to the vehicle (I think it's something like within three feet). That signal is sent to a BCM (ECU), that then talks to other PAssive entry antennas on the vehicle to unlock the door. Simultaneously it talks to the PCM and IPC through the Gateway module, sending a Passive Entry enable signal. Those modules talk to the ignition switch allowing the vehicle to be started. Looks like this happens on what's called the High Speed CAN network. So the question is, if I can access this network via something like the PCM and the PCM isn't properly configured to prevent this, can I override the network without having the key with sufficient tech? That's problematic for a lot of reasons. So no. I don't think you should be able to go to a junkyard or pick and pull and buy a module that could compromise your network and I don't understand why anyone would want that. You absolutely can buy a module from the manufacturer and get a shop (not even a dealership, just an independent shop with the right tools) to configure a module.

atrielienz ,

I think the immobilization is key here and not something I would trust from any third party. If a third party has access to the encryption method, so does a hacker with the right tools.

Additionally, it's configured to the VIN specifically so you can't steal or buy genuine parts with a key you have access to and swap them into a vehicle that those parts don't belong to. Chop shops have the ability to do this in the event that these modules aren't configured properly and don't require the right validation from other modules.

atrielienz ,

What's to stop me from going to a junk yard, paying for a key and the modules in question, attaching them to a different car and stealing that car?

atrielienz ,

That's not true. The paired parts are attached to the VIN. Literally programmed with the VIN of the car and a lot of them are single use for specifically this reason. You don't know and you're very insistent.

atrielienz ,

The government doesn't as heavily regulate your email password or computer. The government does regulate automakers and the vehicles they produce. Included safety and security regulations.

atrielienz , (edited )

What in the straw man argument. Your email doesn't drive on public roads you moron. What are you even talking about.

And if you want to completely own a motor vehicle buy and build a kit car. And the.n go get it inspected because the government won't let you drive it on the road until you can prove it's road worthy.

atrielienz ,

You can't. That's the point. Once those parts are configured to a vin they only work with that vin.

atrielienz ,

Wrong wrong wrong wrong. Go to literally any dealer and ask a tech.

atrielienz ,

Lol. That's a poorly worded excuse for a come back that doesn't make an actual point and puts words in my mouth I never said. Additionally it adds meaning to the words I did say that don't make any sense.

Further, since your computer is in fact fairly insecure (look up how easy it is to just completely bypass windows and install Linux) I wouldn't be opening myself up to further arguments in this vein if I were you. Emails get hacked all the time. It's literally a scammers paradise. Know one of the things that prevents spear phishing and other attacks? A physical security key. Or multi factor authentication. What are you even on.

atrielienz ,

Was that my claim? Did I claim this was the only way? Nope. Never claimed that.

atrielienz ,

I'll log into all data for this. Give me a sec.

atrielienz ,

"Module Swapping And Ordering Using A Different VIN:

Swapping a used module from a vehicle for diagnostic purposes or to complete repairs is likely to cause vehicle symptoms or programming errors and is not recommended. Ordering a replacement module using a VIN from a different vehicle is also not recommended. Most modules on these affected vehicles are VIN/vehicle specific, and hardware variations between modules do exist. Swapping a module from a vehicle or ordering a module using a different vehicle/ VIN can cause ineffective repairs and additional vehicle downtime. Make sure all appropriate WSM procedures are followed when diagnosing the condition before any module replacements and only order modules using the correct VIN. " -GSB 24-7011

"Starting a vehicle session requires the user to select the Read VIN From Vehicle button in FDRS. Once the Read VIN From Vehicle button is selected, FDRS will read the VIN via the CAN from the PCM using OBD-II protocol from PCM Mode 09 data. The PCM will report the VIN to FDRS, which displays it in the VIN entry box. The user will then select Go, at which time FDRS will retrieve a vehicle model from the servers for that VIN, including which modules are equipped, the powertrain type, and the vehicle program information. This process occurs while FDRS displays a progress bar stating, Downloading Vehicle Information. Once obtained, FDRS will perform a network test on the vehicle and read the part numbers and DTC in all equipped modules." -GSB 24-7011

https://www.macheforum.com/site/attachments/gsb-24-7011_fdrs_programming_job_aid-pdf.117742/

I would be willing to believe that the manufacturer absolutely can do what you're saying but only the actual manufacturer, not a tech at a dealership or independent shop.

If you were to do this with say a 2020 F150 (went to a junkyard, bought a BCM, plugged it into your truck) the other modules would not be able to validate it.

" Perimeter Alarm:

The BCM controls the operation of the perimeter alarm. It monitors inputs from the RKE system, the passive entry system, the power door lock system, the PATS and the ignition status to determine when to arm the perimeter alarm.

The BCM monitors all of the door ajar switches, the luggage compartment lid ajar input, the hood ajar switch, the intrusion sensor, the CAN and the ignition status to determine when to activate the perimeter alarm. When the BCM detects an input indicating an unauthorized entry into the vehicle, the BCM activates the perimeter alarm by sounding the horn and flashing all the turn signals and interior courtesy lamps at regular intervals.

The BCM monitors the RKE system, the passive entry system, and the PATS to determine when to disarm the perimeter alarm.

A switch inhibit feature temporarily disables the door lock control switches and the interior luggage compartment lid release switch 20 seconds after the vehicle is electronically locked. For detailed information of the switch inhibit feature,
Refer to: Handles, Locks, Latches and Entry Systems - Overview (501-14 Handles, Locks, Latches and Entry Systems, Description and Operation) .

Additionally, there is a door lock LED indicator located on each door window sill. The indicators provide lock/unlock indication for each door. They illuminate when the door is locked and are off when the door is unlocked. For detailed information of the door lock LED indicators,
Refer to: Handles, Locks, Latches and Entry Systems - Overview (501-14 Handles, Locks, Latches and Entry Systems, Description and Operation) .

Visual and audible feedback is also provided when locking or unlocking the vehicle. For detailed information of the vehicle locking and unlocking feedback,
Refer to: Handles, Locks, Latches and Entry Systems - Overview (501-14 Handles, Locks, Latches and Entry Systems, Description and Operation) .

Arming The Perimeter Alarm

The perimeter alarm is ready to arm any time the ignition is off. The perimeter alarm pre-arms when any of the following occur:

Pressing the lock button on a RKE transmitter
Pressing the door lock control switch to the lock position with a front door open, and then closing the door
Locking the vehicle with the passive entry feature

Once the system is pre-armed, there is a 20-second countdown before the perimeter alarm is armed. Each entry point to the vehicle (hood, door and luggage compartment lid) is armed separately and must be closed before that entry point begins the 20-second countdown to become armed. If all entry points are closed, the turn signals flash upon locking indicating that all entry points are entering the 20-second countdown.

Perimeter Alarm Activation

The perimeter alarm has a 12-second delay when the driver front door is opened without using a valid programmed RKE transmitter or a passive key to unlock the vehicle. During the delay, a chime sounds. If the perimeter alarm is not disarmed within the 12-second delay, the alarm activates.

The perimeter alarm activates when:

the driver front door is opened without first receiving an unlock command from the passive entry feature or a valid programmed RKE transmitter, and the 12-second delay has expired.
any other door, the luggage compartment lid or the hood is opened without first receiving an electronic unlock command from the passive entry feature or a valid programmed RKE transmitter.
the ignition transitions to RUN without a valid PATS key read received.
the BCM detects an attempt by a diagnostic scan tool to establish communication on the CAN .

The perimeter alarm only activates 10 times per arming cycle. After that, the alarm does not activate. To enable the perimeter alarm again, disarm the perimeter alarm and then arm it again.

Disarming The Perimeter Alarm

The perimeter alarm disarms when:

pressing the unlock button on a door lock control switch within the 20-second pre-arm.
the smart unlock feature activates within the initial 20-second pre-arm.
pressing the unlock button on a valid programmed RKE transmitter.
pressing the luggage compartment lid release button on a programmed RKE transmitter (this only disarms the luggage compartment lid entry point with the rest of the vehicle remaining armed).
using a valid programmed key to change the ignition to RUN.
unlocking a front door or opening the luggage compartment lid using the passive entry feature.

CAN Protection Strategy

When the perimeter alarm is armed, the BCM monitors the CAN . If a scan tool is connected to the DLC , and an attempt is made to establish a session with the BCM , it activates the perimeter alarm.

Every time the BCM detects an unauthorized access (alarm activates), all BCM programming, PID monitoring and self-test sessions are blocked for 10 minutes. At the end of the 10 minute time period, the horn chirps to indicate the 1 minute of opportunity to communicate with the BCM and program keys if none are available.

Refer to: Anti-Theft Key Programming - Scan Tool (419-01B Passive Anti-Theft System (PATS), General Procedures) .

Component Description

Door Latch

The door ajar switch, the lock/unlock solenoid and the lock/unlock status input switch are part of the door latch and not serviceable separately.

The door ajar switch is monitored by the BCM and the primary function is for the courtesy lamps system.
Refer to: Interior Lighting - System Operation and Component Description (417-02 Interior Lighting, Description and Operation) .

The lock/unlock solenoid is controlled by the BCM for locking and unlocking the door.
Refer to: Handles, Locks, Latches and Entry Systems - Overview (501-14 Handles, Locks, Latches and Entry Systems, Description and Operation) .

The lock/unlock status input switch is used to illuminate the door lock status indicator.
Refer to: Handles, Locks, Latches and Entry Systems - Overview (501-14 Handles, Locks, Latches and Entry Systems, Description and Operation) .

Hood Ajar Switch

The hood ajar switch is a single pole switch (integrated into the hood latch) that is normally closed when the hood is closed. When the hood is opened, the hood ajar switch opens to indicate an open hood.

The BCM sends a signal to the hood ajar switch, and based on the input, the BCM determines if the hood is open or closed.

Intrusion And Inclination Sensor

The intrusion sensor is powered and monitored by the BCM at all times. When the perimeter alarm is armed, it monitors the passenger compartment for movement by emitting acoustic ultrasonic pulses. If movement is detected, it sends a signal to the BCM .

The inclination sensor is powered and monitored by the BCM at all times. When the perimeter alarm is armed, the inclination sensor monitors the vehicle for tilt or inclination from events such as significant cargo removal or addition, jacking up a wheel assembly, loading onto a tow truck, or suspension modifications causing significant front/rear ride height differences. If sufficient tilt is detected, the inclination sensor sends a signal to the BCM .

When the intrusion/inclination sensor is replaced, the LIN New Module Initialization procedure must be carried out using a diagnostic scan tool.

BCM

The BCM controls the operation of the perimeter alarm. Based on input, the BCM arms, disarms, activates or deactivates the perimeter alarm.

The BCM requires PMI when replaced. Additionally, at least 2 keys must be programmed and the parameter reset procedure carried out." - All data

On older cars you probably could go to a junkyard to get the PCM, BCM and so on. But that doesn't work on newer cars specifically not ones with PAT systems. You'll immobilize the car or put it in limp mode. If any one of those modules doesn't recognise the saved in the other modules. And you'd need a lot of parts to get around that.

Facebook snooped on users' Snapchat traffic in secret project, documents reveal ( techcrunch.com )

Meta tried to gain a competitive advantage over its competitors, including Snapchat and later Amazon and YouTube, by analyzing the network traffic of how its users were interacting with Meta’s competitors. Given these apps’ use of encryption, Facebook needed to develop special technology to get around it....

atrielienz ,

Nah. Ban these companies or don't, we need user privacy protection laws.

atrielienz ,

Lol

atrielienz ,

I still think it's a bit funny that someone on Apple's payroll is being critical of another company's shady business practices when they are essentially doing just as much shady shit with user data.

atrielienz , (edited )

I didn't say you had to find it funny. Humour is subjective. But go off.

I'll explain since people insist. You'd think Apple's lawyers would have advised against this since really the company also makes money from gathering and monetizing user data. But apparently not.

atrielienz ,

See the below comments about what Apple still pays him as a founder.

atrielienz ,

At this point I think you're just being obtuse on purpose.

atrielienz ,

You know what, you're right. That's fair. And yes, that is the comment I meant.

atrielienz ,

I agree. We do the same and it's not okay when we do it either. But you can recognise that the world (and the US at large,) needs better privacy laws and regulations regarding user data while also feeling that tik tok is invasive and so closely tied to the CCP that it is actually a dangerous attack vector that has its hooks in the American people. I honestly think the bill is BS. Sure, the CCP is a threat to US national security. And yes, they absolutely are using tik tok to that effect. I fully believe that. But I want user privacy laws. I want protections. I don't want this kind of invasive app (tik tok, meta, Amazon, google et al) tracking me. And I want the government to do something to allow me to take back control of my data.

atrielienz ,

Not on a comparable level with China, Iran, or Russia. This isn't a fair comparison. Which makes this comment somewhat disengenuous.

atrielienz , (edited )

I literally see post about the Genocide all the time and not just on Lemmy. So is the government censoring that? Is it?

You're talking about genocide right now? Government came and got you, did it?

Seriously, nothing is stopping people from talking about it, sharing information, or providing claims it's happening or proof. If you're suggesting platforms are taking that info off their servers, I am just gonna say that social media is awash with videos, articles, and claims. Those platforms may remove data that violates their EULA, or would leave them open to litigation which makes sense. You wouldn't make the claim that they're censoring the war on Ukraine. But violent video of first hand accounts have absolutely been removed from social media. The same happened in Yemen, Iran, and half a dozen other war torn countries including several African countries.

I don't agree with the US providing weapons or support to Israel. I don't disagree that genocide is happening in Gaza. I am not Pro Israel. I absolutely believe that Israel is actively violating the Geneva convention and committing crimes against noncombatants and people who have nothing to do with any terrorist activity.

But I also agree that Hamas is a terrorist group. And unfortunately that's just how any group of anti-government freedom fighters who attack their governments are labelled. It's been this way throughout history. The American side of the revolutionary war? They were terrorists. The victors write the history books everywhere.

And hiding in schools, places of worship, and hospitals and getting innocent people killed because those are losses you're willing to allow? That's terrorist behaviour. What is happening is absolutely unconscionable. From both sides. Hamas has its fair share of atrocities. To them, that's the price of freedom.

atrielienz ,

I don't disagree. If you read any of my statements on this topic you'd see that I am not Pro US when it comes to US companies and user data. It's a crap shoot. Literally every American tech company is supplying the US government with access to their user data, and that's been in the news for years. Their user data centric business practices and ad aggregation services are how they make money and that's what I would think is a well known fact except some people even here don't seem to recognise it. Tik tok is definitely not alone in this.

However, the way that US and China control and access that data is not the same, and further the way the two countries are run, the control they exert over their citizens and the repercussions are different. My statement was not about whether or not you should trust either government or the tech companies of either country more or less.

It was acknowledging that the two countries and their relationships with their citizens is not the same and further that while both are problematic (and I don't necessarily agree with forcing the sale of Tik tok because I don't think it will fix the real problem which I believe is user privacy and regulation of that/ rights given to users), tik tok is problematic and China is not safe. China should not be allowed to operate this kind of operation in a foreign sovereign nation and use it as a way to exert outside control over its populace. And yes. No country should be doing that, US included.

If you think this bill is somehow going to make your user data safer? You're wrong. If you think tik tok is going to just up and leave the US? I seriously doubt that. If you think the US and China are one and the same, you're wrong. Every single time there is push back against these companies in the US, we gain ground. That cannot ever be said for the Chinese populace in relation to the CCP's control over the user data of its citizens and they are actively monitoring those citizens (which I wouldn't claim the US is doing whole hog). If people in China try to push back against the monitoring the CCP disappears them and their families. Jack Ma? Made some anti-CCP comments and disappeared for like a year. What billionaire in the US is just missing for a year after making anti-government comments?

And unless you have some data to back up that the US is actively monitoring every single one of its citizens user data (yeah I know about the silly NSA data base and the laws and protocols enacted after 9/11, I'm talking new and relevant data) to back up any claims that China and the US access, or treat user data the same, don't bother responding.

atrielienz ,

Is the beach the place where the breach happened?

atrielienz ,

Centralisation is something we see in other facets of our society and it fails there too. Look for instance at the grass roots movement to have a third party in the US government. The numbers aren't there even though people agree the 2 party system is broken. So you're correct that centralisation is an issue, but I think op is also correct that grass roots movements don't have any teeth in the internet space, and an equally large or larger power has to step in and in this case legislate. Not that it seems you were arguing the other point exactly. Just that I think the two points are kind of entwined together.

atrielienz ,

This looks like a bun filled with guac and mayonnaise.

atrielienz ,

https://kbin.melroy.org/m/technology@lemmy.world/t/169337/-/comment/1533639
Pretty much.

atrielienz , (edited )

The thing is, the Chinese Government has some serious real aspirations for world domination. They literally want to supplant the US as THE world power. And tik tok is very open exposing US citizens to propaganda if nothing else. On top of that Tik Tok literally admitted that their algorithm was used to try to spy on journalists and track down their sources. They claim it was a lapse of judgement. But that alone has terrifying implications. I don't use tik tok but my understanding is it still has data on me and other people like me because I know several people who use it.

All the other tech companies who are gathering data like this on their users are a problem. And the number of algorithms used by theses companies and their effect on the mental health of the users are also a problem. But the only reason the US government is going after tik tok is specifically because of its ties to the CCP.

https://www.welivesecurity.com/2023/03/24/what-tiktok-knows-you-should-know-tiktok/

atrielienz ,

Lol Did you know India banned tik tok?

US sues Apple for illegal monopoly over smartphones ( www.theverge.com )

The US Department of Justice and 16 state and district attorneys general accused Apple of operating an illegal monopoly in the smartphone market in a new antitrust lawsuit. The DOJ and states are accusing Apple of driving up prices for consumers and developers at the expense of making users more reliant on its iPhones.

atrielienz ,

Can you be more contagious? Virulently so? Pandemic level? I need some of that good EU user privacy law plague in my life.

atrielienz ,

Hasn't been my experience and I use one pretty exclusively at my work. Had a surface pro 4 before the surface pro 7 and that was still working when I got upgraded to the 7 (mostly for better specs as some of the programs I need got updates that needed more processing power). I work in an industrial environment too so that thing goes through some rather extreme work areas. I have also personally owned the surface Go and it still works just fine.

atrielienz ,

So, I can see a lot of problems with this. Specifically the same problems that the public and regulating bodies face when deciding to keep or overturn section 230. Free speech isn't necessarily what I'm worried about here. Mostly because it is already agreed that free speech is a construct that only the government is actually beholden to. Message boards have and will continue to censor content as they see fit.

Section 230 basically stipulates that companies that provide online forums (Meta, Alphabet, 4Chan etc) are not liable for the content that their users post. And part of the reason it works is because these companies adhere to strict guidelines in regards to content and most importantly moderation.

Section 230(c)(2) further provides "Good Samaritan" protection from civil liability for operators of interactive computer services in the good faith removal or moderation of third-party material they deem "obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected."

Reddit, Facebook, 4Chan et all do have rules and regulations they require their users to follow in order to post. And for the most part the communities on these platforms are self policing. There just aren't enough paid moderators to make it work otherwise.

That being said, the real problem is that this really kind of indirectly challenges section 230. Mostly because it very barely skirts around whether the relevant platforms can themselves be considered publishers, or at all responsible for the content the users post and very much attacks how users are presented with content to keep them engaged via algorithms (which is directly how they make their money).

Even if the lawsuits fail, this will still be problematic. It could lead to draconian moderation of what can be posted and by whom. So now all race related topics regardless of whether they include hate speech could be censored for example. Politics? Censored. The discussion of potential new laws? Censored.

But I think it will be worse than that. The algorithm is what makes the ad space these companies sell so valuable. And this is a direct attack on that. We lack the consumer privacy protections to protect the public from this eventuality. If the ad space isn't valuable the data will be. And there's nothing stopping these companies from selling user data. Some of them already do. What these apps do in the background is already pretty invasive. This could lead to a furthering of that invasive scraping of data. I don't like that.

That being said there is a point I agree with. These companies literally do make their algorithm addictive and it absolutely will push content at users. If that content is of an objectionable nature, so long as it isn't outright illegal, these companies do not care. Because they do gain from it monetarily.

What we actually need is data privacy protections. Holding these companies accountable for their algorithms is a good idea. But I don't agree that this is the way to do that constructively. It would be better to flesh out 230 as a living document that can change with the times. Because when it was written the Internet landscape was just different.

What I would like to see is for platforms to moderate content posted and representing itself as fact. We don't see that nearly enough on places like reddit. Users can post anything as fact and the echo chambers will rally around it if they believe it. It's not really incredibly difficult to radicalise a person. But the platforms aren't doing that on purpose. The other users are, and the algorithms are helping them.

atrielienz , (edited )

It's always been that way though. Back in the day on Myspace or MSN chatrooms there were whole lists of words that were auto censored and could result in a ban (temp or permanent). We literally had whole lists of alternates to use. You couldn't say sex, or kill back then either. The difference is the algorithm. I acknowledge in my comment that these platforms already censor things they find objectionable. Part of that is to keep Section 230 as it is. A perhaps more relevant part of it is to keep advertisers happy so they continue to buy ad space. A small portion of it may even be to keep the majority of the user base happy because users who don't agree with the supposed ideologies on a platform will leave it and that's less eyeballs on ads.

atrielienz ,

My father in law drives a 2015 F150. That outlet on the center console is 120 Volt outlet supplies 400watts. But a fridge can be anything from 300 to almost 800. I'm not saying it's impossible. And with newer trucks (especially the lightning and the F150 hybrid), I would believe it more readily. Ford is quick to market this in new trucks but I wouldn't count on it with older trucks. I'm just pointing out that real work experience says your mileage may vary. Especially in places like Texas or Arizona where your battery is going through extreme heat cycles due to the weather from like February to November.

atrielienz ,

With the rise in power banks and phones being rated in Amp Hours, I think this may be a recent change, and certainly one I have noticed.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • test
  • worldmews
  • mews
  • All magazines
    •