Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | neya's commentslogin

First thing I do after I purchase any smart TV - turn off network access, disable auto-updates (mine is a Sony). So, this way 1) it can collect whatever it wants but it can't phone back home and 2) I don't wake up one day and find myself on a learning curve I didn't sign up for (happened to me once, they completely re-did the UI, for worse!)

How do you watch anything without network access?

I use Apple TV and give it network access instead, this way the TV doesn't have the chance to update. My Apple TV is set to update manually too. Of course, the assumption here is Apple TV doesn't phone home - and I'm no Apple fanboy, but I think this is as close as we get to online streaming with privacy.

Roku

> In September 2024, Amandla Thomas-Johnson was a Ph.D. candidate studying in the U.S. on a student visa when he briefly attended a pro-Palestinian protest.

Why would you go to a country for study purposes - where you explicitly tell the visa officers you're on US soil ONLY for study purposes - which is what the student visa explicitly grants you to do and then participate in a protest against the very country that granted you the study visa and then get mad that you are under investigation and would have been kicked out for violating the said visa? That's so bizarre.


> where you explicitly tell the visa officers you're on US soil ONLY for study purposes

What in the world does “ONLY for study purposes” mean? 24 hours a day, every day of the week?

> participate in a protest against the very country that granted you the study visa and then get mad that you are under investigation and would have been kicked out for violating the said visa? That's so bizarre.

First, he briefly attended the protest. Not the same as participating. I doubt the data from Google indicated he was holding a sign, shouting slogans, or speaking on stage. And it doesn’t sound like there was any marching or sit-in involved. (And if so, for 5 minutes?)

Second, why are you willfully equating a pro-Palestinian protest with being an anti-US protesT? Was the purpose of the protest to raise charitable funds, encourage more open discussion about the war on campus, provide moral support to Palestinian classmates, and/or any of a myriad of other purposes?

Finally, even if the purpose of the protest was politically motivated —- to push US policy on Israel and Palestine to change, how is that bizarre? In your mind is any protest that seeks to change a government’s policy at that moment an assault on that government, or on that nation? Someone who protests the death penalty, protests for stronger/weaker abortion laws, stronger/weaker gun laws, etc?

This is the USA we’re talking about. Despite all our faults (and they are legion), it is the bedrock of our founding and our core principles that democracy is a participatory process. Not just on Election Day. Throughout history we have advanced as a people and a nation because individuals have stepped up and spoken up. That has always been what has pushed us forward.

Bizarre indeed.


> 24 hours a day, every day of the week?

Strawman

>First, he briefly attended the protest. Not the same as participating. I doubt the data from Google indicated he was holding a sign, shouting slogans, or speaking on stage. And it doesn’t sound like there was any marching or sit-in involved. (And if so, for 5 minutes?)

You misunderstand. I'm not against protesting, nor am I against the reasons behind his protests. He may have had valid reasons. What I'm saying is - if you are a green card holder or a citizen, this would be very little risk vs going to a foreign country in a study visa and doing what he did. If you pay tens of thousands of dollars to get a degree from whatever country, for whatever reasons, why would you want to gamble all of it?

Also, if you are getting into a fight, you need to make sure you have the upper hand. As it stands, it is him who is in hiding and crossing borders, not the government agents or the corporate white collars that gave away his data. That's my point.

"When in Rome, do as the Romans do"


Author of the article is a journalist, attending a protest could very legitimately be for study purposes in his case.

Political events are usually part of student university life in western-tradition universities. From my personal experience, it was hard to completely avoid them if you had any involvement in the student extracurricular life.

I disagree. I cultivated a preference for the basement terminal labs while I was attending UCSD. While I was definitely in touch with the communist/socialist underbelly of dissenters there, I never found myself wrapped up in rallies or protests or any sort of political activism.

In fact, my mother had strongly discouraged me from attending UC Berkeley, because of the politicized environment there, the protests, the drug use. I had no interest in that stuff to begin with!

I read the on-campus commie newsletter that was distributed free. I ate at the vegan cafe out in the woods. It was literally called "The Ché Café". But I literally attended no protests or rallies. If they went on, I was steering clear or unaware of them. I went to rock concerts and other stuff at the student center, so I wasn't ignorant of events there.

Furthermore, in community college, I found engagement with a diversity of student groups, and most of them weren't political. There was an Asian-Pacific Islanders group (I am not) which had social events and films and no political advocacy (because they were probably oriented towards cultural exchange as well as assimilation.) There was an entrepreneur's group, an amateur radio group, and a cybersecurity group. Yes, there was a lot of activism on campus. There were rallies and protests and art installations. But I didn't partake, and it was basically easy to cultivate friendships and networking with apolitical people.


I think most countries on earth have very little tolerance for visitors protesting against the government.

Yes. And whether protests should be allowed or not as part of the visa is a different discourse, but most countries simply forbid it.

And probably bought a pizza at some point, too. That's not studying. Shameful liar.

That's not a meaningful comparison. Eating a pizza isn't the same as violating the terms of your visa - which is an explicit contract between you and the country you're entering which you sign before you enter the said country.

Please quote the clause he violated in said contract.

Of all the words to use in the title, they chose "prompts" when talking about AI. Had to read it twice because, if you assume the AI "prompts" equivalent, the whole title becomes gibberish.

As an aside, I love the website design. Very early 2000s vibe without costing readability (on desktop).

> As an aside, I love the website design. Very early 2000s vibe without costing readability (on desktop).

I read it on mobile and, while not optimised for it, it was very easy to zoom into the middle column to read.

I wish more blogs did this: simply setting your content to 38em and doing nothing else makes the content readable on mobile.


Second this. Their API is such a breeze and it is so much more automation friendly than any other messenger platform. It has a good adoption % too, otherwise Signal is the real winner if we account for privacy.

Even more automation friendly than Matrix?

It's a bit less automation-friendly because the UX is not great when the bot doesn't have its own phone number (which costs money). I think it has better privacy, though. Matrix server operators can read message metadata.

Telegram server operators can read message meta data and messages

You're right, Matrix is a much better option than Telegram. I misread the thread as comparing Signal to Matrix.

Unfortunately, I haven't used Matrix personally enough to comment, sorry. But, I've heard only good things about it so far.

This should ironically start at the VC level - and that includes YC et al. Some one comes and says "hey, we got this idea, we collect facial recognition data for training proprietary AI models", the response from the VC should "I'm gonna stop you right there. This is unethical."

Not "Did you say I can 5x my ROI? Here, shut up and take my money!"


    Capital eschews no profit, or very small profit, just as Nature was formerly
    said to abhor a vacuum. With adequate profit, capital is very bold. A certain
    10 per cent. will ensure its employment anywhere; 20 per cent. certain will
    produce eagerness; 50 per cent., positive audacity; 100 per cent. will make it
    ready to trample on all human laws; 300 per cent., and there is not a crime at
    which it will scruple, nor a risk it will not run, even to the chance of its
    owner being hanged. If turbulence and strife will bring a profit, it will freely
    encourage both. Smuggling and the slave-trade have amply proved all that is
    here stated.
We today can also add crypto schemes and mass surveillance to the examples.

And mind you, VC are people who are both pretty good at earning money and also eager for even more money. That's how they got to where they are, after all, not necessarily by being virtuous (over a certain minimally required amount, or a social signaling of possessing such an amount).


YC is responsible for Sam Altman, need I say more?

Fair enough. But, to be fair to them, they did have a falling out. There was a story on here how it went all the way to PG and then they asked Sam to leave (Something like that). I think saw it in a comment here, really don't remember.

When you put it that way, the answer is obvious:

Assume VCs are brainless profit maximizers who don't understand ethics. How do you get them to say "I'm gonna stop you right there"?

Answer: Make it unprofitable to collect this data. Change the incentives.

So really, the correct answer IS on the legal level. Make a set of laws which make it burdensome at best and completely unprofitable at worst, and then the incentives within the system aligns.


Agree with your point and the solution. Make it risky to operate - so that most VCs would wash their hands off due to legal risks. Kind of like what happened to the crypto space. But, it always gets worse before it gets better. Tons of rug pulls happened before SEC took action.

It seems like in the last number of years, VC has been prioritizing becoming the beneficiary of the whims of the regime.

In short, I wonder if this has any implications about their confidence in startups' viability in private sectors


If you reached point B from point A - and you tell someone "I would like to go back", then you are expecting to go back to A. Not some intermediate, arbitrarily chosen point C.

The fix is to not to implement anti-user patterns. What you're describing is a loophole around it.

> The fix is to not to implement anti-user patterns.

That's not a fix the user can implement themselves. Holding down the back button is comparatively trivial.


Why on Earth would the user be expected to implement a fix for a problem they didn't cause themselves in the first place?

Why the Earth should the user not want to implement a fix/workaround/whatever for a problem they didn't cause themselves but can trivially solve?

Because I expect my browser to work for me instead of having memorize workarounds for the new web annoyance of the day.

Clicking "back", noticing that the site broke it, moving the mouse and long-pressing "back" (I normally navigate with a mouse thumb button or a trackpad gesture) is much more annoying than my browser just preventing this from happening in the first place.


> I go out of my way to avoid using external packages.

I go out of my way to avoid Javascript. Because in all my years of writing software, it has 100% of the time been the root cause for vulnerabilities. These days I just use LiveView.


HTMX > Live View

Sure, if that works for you, then great.

A very polite reminder that Elixir exists.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: