None of this is what I was looking for.
Meta is plugging in USBs or connecting to people’s accounts en masse to get into people’s encrypted backups? I think not.
People keep claiming Meta does this, does that when it comes to microphones. Where is the proof? I haven’t seen a SINGLE piece of evidence to show that Meta is listening to you at all times when you aren’t using the app. I only ever see people’s anecdotes of “it heard me talk about something cause it popped up later”.
Show me evidence that Apple has a backdoor for companies like Meta, that circumvent their normal iOS functionality.
Well I can kinda see where they are coming from. How do you know it’s gonna stick around if it can’t make money? It isn’t even about making a profit either, but covering costs.
There are costs associated with hosting all this stuff. Right now donations are how instances keep the lights on (most of the time).
What happens when there is more and more users joining?
It’s not imposibile, it’s unlikely, and would be noticeable.
Dunno how app permissions prove that they are always listening when those permissions are required to access the mic at any point in time, including when you’re using the app and invoke it yourself.
This is where you lose people. It’s been proven time and time again that the mics on your phones aren’t transmitting things back without you knowing about it.
Facebook isn’t always listening in on your conversations. They don’t need to. It’s useless data.
Voice isn’t how they figure out what you like and are probably talking about at any given moment with other people.
Here’s a short podcast episode that gets the point across: https://gimletmedia.com/amp/shows/reply-all/z3hlwr
You could literally physically destroy the microphone of your phone, and you’ll still get ads served up like “they are listening to you”
Isn’t that the reason to use arch? I remember last time I installed arch, about 5 years ago now I had to fiddle with everything just to get it working lol.
Idk, find it hard to believe sexually explicit content is what is gonna make or break it. The author seems to be talking about different degrees of promiscuity in the same article, so I am having a hard time following exactly.
In one paragraph, author is talking about how its boring cause it won’t allow sexually explicit material. But goes on to talk about how people are getting written up for harmless stuff like saying “boobs”, which to me is a WAY different problem lol.
I’m in it until this happens.