renholder

Fair enough. Cloudflar's promotional site for 1.1.1.1 seems to tout DNSSEC pretty heavily and only mentions DoH once, I believe.

Still, clients still need to be configured for DoH, yeah?

>The company Cloudflare has a publicly accessible DNS at the address 1.1.1.1 that they claim is encrypted and secure.

For it to be "encrypted and secure", the client would have to be configured to use DNSSEC, yeah? As far as I'm aware, most clients don't come with DNSSEC enabled (in OOBE configurations), so isn't this a bit misleading?

If it were me, I'd go with a pager. Probably too old school for what you're looking for but it's purely passive, from what I remember.

Sadly, the Matrix has caught on and those are being removed. =[

The title is intentionally misleading (click-bait?). EU government websites does not equal EU members' government websites.

For our American friends, that would be akin to saying the federal government, when you mean the states' governments.

>Pagers are still used in some industries...

I never said that they weren't, yeah?

I suggested it being a difficult alternative because of the wide-spread use of cell phones. For example, in my country, the national paging system was taken down in August of 2011; so, there's no consumer paging services. B2B (which hospitals would be inclusive of) still exist, to be sure, but that means nothing in the overall scheme of a consumer trying to not buy a cell phone.

>...how many people are there consciously not buying a smartphone in fear of it being used to spy on them...

I'd say that the number is relatively small to non-existent but that might have more to do with the fact that cell phones are more a requirement for day-to-day life than anything else.

For example, try to sign-up for paging services, as a means to replace your cellphone with a passive-only device, and see how far you can actually get with that idea.

Or try to buy a CRT-TV.[0]

At some point you have to concede that means to go against society's trends are no longer there, unless you make them yourself - and most people either don't have the resources nor the time or a combinations of either to do that.

[0] - https://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=lp_560864_nr_p_n_feature_thre...

>If the next generation of smart devices is advertised as "no hidden cameras and microphones! (we'll just spy on you with the visible cameras and microphones)", I don't think this would be a win.

Agreed but we have to consider that it's entirely plausible that we're in the minority in this line of thinking.

For those of us, who don't want to deal with their uMatrix looking like a fucking Christmas Tree, the WebArchive link[0].

[0] - https://web.archive.org/web/20190315210024/https://bittersou...

My first experience with maths anxiety was when going from degrees to radians[0]. Memorising/Remembering the conversions was, for some reason, my fucking kryptonite and, feck me, if I didn't feel like I was falling behind because of it (hint: I was).

[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radian#Conversions

>If you don't mean a Google search, I'm not sure what you could mean.

If you're considering buying a motorcycle and have a friend (or a group of friends) that own(s) a motorcylce, are you more likely to ask that friend (or that group) the pros/cons of owning a motorcycle and for their recommendations or are you far more likely to use "nature language sentences" in Google to illicit that information (e.g.: "I'm thinking of buying a motorcycle")?

I'm going to posit that the former occurs far more frequently than the latter and that this is the potential "untapped market" for targeted advertising that a "private social network" would be after.

>It would serve as a deterrent.

This argument has never worked in the history of ever. The examples from history are far too numerous to list but if you really must need an example, the War on Drugs would serve that purpose.

>...shouldn't take every measure possible in preventing its platform from hosting some of the most abusive and criminal content on the planet.

If you want to genuinely prevent the most abusive and criminal content on the planet, then - as the comment you're replying to suggests - the only sure way to prevent it is to not allow it to be hosted/connected to/shared/etc. anwyhere across the internet but since you can't ensure that, then we default tothe internet being the medium that makes that possible/happen, so...

Doing the nerd's work. Thank you! <3

>...and use ads to make it available to everyone?

Could you ever believe that's not all that he does with ads?

>The ad dollars come from knowing you, not concealing you.

Advertising dollars are far more lucrative if you think you can trust where you're sharing your deepest, darkests...

Imagine what people would share between themselves if it wasn't "public for the world to see". Imagine how many more data points that would produce for targeted advertisements on the Facebook platform, alone.

Edit: Including necessary reference to Bill Hicks[0].

[0] - https://youtu.be/GaD8y-CGhMw

The majority of your argument seems to be Starbucks provides a sort of performance art, which can't be replaced by machines and, whilst partially true, the general idea of automation is "fire and forget".

I pay €29K (gotta love the exchange rate, right now) for a machine which will replace a worker that I probably pay for year the same service. Sure it's not "artisanal" but, given enough time to tweak the machine's behaviours, it could be.

For the lower-end markets, definitely, it would be a god-send (in the ROI sense); however, I think your arguments of dissuasion that Starbucks would never do this are akin to the arguments of high-end car manufacturers never moving to automation to build vehicles.

Put succinctly: If the end-goal of business is to increase the profit-marigin (which it is), then someone, somewhere will find a way to make that happen and this would be, in general, no exception to that rule. Eventually, they'll hit that sweet spot to make it work; even if it's slightly sub-par from the quality of today's product.

Since we're talking personal experience, Signal has never had an outage (that I was aware of).

I don't know why but I half-expect that to be a ROSMT[0] link.

[0] - https://youtu.be/OvW2xeSn4As

Just to note: Some death-metal bands have positive lyrics[0,1]... (Though, whether they can really be called a death metal band is possibly a point of contention.)

[0] - https://youtu.be/lk2-bgwA0Ro

[1] - https://youtu.be/Nh10gL_GP_w

My argument was one user who requested one page and didn't want to consent to cookies/tracking in order to offset the ridiculously low cost of serving the actual page (I'm considering the cost to make it as having already been burdened, as it's already being served).

The OC didn't consider the fact that you can have advertising without cookies/tracking/fingerprinting and just reduced it to absrudism by saying that the company would bear the brunt of the cost but even the cost of that single event is marginally insignificant, overall.

So, no, my argument was never about all digital goods being free. However, if we want to play the devil's advocate and utilise your reduction to absurdism: By your argument, shouldn't all digital goods be paid for...? For example, Ubuntu costs money to host and serve, yeah?

>...and then tags it with your name...

Even that's not wholly necessary required. If they can obtain data from your own Facebook app (or an app using the Facebook SDK), it can place you in that area around the time the photo was taken and given it's friends you have connections with on Facebook, it's easy enough to surmise it's you without the necessary confirmation.

Seems very Orwellian, to be sure, but not out of the grasps of the end-goals of data harvesting/profiling.

>In fairness it can add up pretty quickly on popular sites.

Aye, if they're only looking at it from a "cookie placement/tracking or nothing" hard-limit perspective, which is what the OC posited it as.

...but if other sites can absorb the costs, case in point: NPR, why is it such a dastardly evil thing to point out? Is there some foolhearted belief that if we cut tracking, tomorrow, the internet would cease to function? Is there absolutely no room for advertisements without cookies/pixels in the modern world...? Do we really believe that it's that expensive to serve webpages?

>So websites are supposed to just absorb the cost? That seems like a ridiculous stance.

The €0.00002 it took to serve that one page just because the user doesn't want to consent to cookie placement/tracking? Is it really that harmful?

NPR seems to do this just fine for GDPR reasons: Decline and Visit Plain Text Site

>For most of its length, the Amazon isn't anywhere close to too wide to bridge—in the dry season. But during the rainy season, the river rises thirty feet, and crossings that were once three miles wide can balloon to thirty miles in a matter of weeks. The soft sediment that makes up the river bank is constantly eroding, and the river is often full of debris, including floating vegetation islands called matupás, which can measure up to 10 square acres. It's a civil engineer's worst nightmare.

Isn't this the predominance of what the ACE (Army Corps of Engineers) deals with when it comes to the Mississippi River[0]?

[0] - https://www.tulane.edu/~bfleury/envirobio/enviroweb/FloodCon...

>Rewriting it in JavaScript or C# may take longer.

This is very true. If we look at Exchange, as an example, most of it was ported to .NET between E12 (2007) and E14 (2010) but Information Store wasn't able to be fully ported to C# until E15 (2013)[0,1].

[0] - https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/exchange/managed-store-exch...

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Microsoft_Exchange_...

Such granular monitoring brings #micromanaging to a literal meaning. Feck that...

WOW64 is a 64-bit "wrapper" for 32-bit processes. You can see this when you debug a WOW64 process in WinDbg[0]; so, the system is agnostic about it's "bitness" because it "appears" to be an x64 process but it's really 32-bit, just wrapped. Thus, the posit. :)

[0] - https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/desktop/WinProg64/d...

Calculator has been around since ninteen-eighty-something-or-other[0] and this seems to be a revamp of the base code, with a XAML (read: WPF) wrapper[1].

Aside from the obvious answer of them using C++ based upon "using something you know and that works", why shouldn't they have used C++? (Genuinely wanting to know/understand.)

It would seem like a monolithic task to rearchitecture the entire app versus just dropping the code-behind into a new UI wrapper, yeah? I'm not excusing it, to be sure, just explaining the potential ROI perspective they might've had when they stuck with C++.

[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Calculator#History

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Calculator#Windows_10

Most would even say statistically significant enough to order the planes grounded in their own countries...