The article is fine IMO, but upon further reflection, you’re right that OpenAI doesn’t deserve the benefit of the doubt. I’ve amended my opinion.

Old Infomaniak stance: privacy without compromise

Infomaniak describes itself as an “ethical cloud” company and one that doesn’t compromise on “ecology, privacy, or people.”

New Infomaniak stance: Trust The Institutions!

Infomaniak spokesperson Thomas Jacobsen… believed Yen showed a “lack of knowledge of Swiss political institutions” and called for finding the right balance, not looking for extremes.

Infomaniak argued that anonymity prevents justice, saying there must be a “happy medium” to prevent the digital landscape becoming a “Wild West.”

Either they are fundamentally changing their way of doing business, or their definition of privacy does not align with reality’s definition of privacy.

Something OP conveniently fails to point out is that in China, online ID verification is already mandatory. It just requires feeding your private details into social media sites manually.

Lao Dongyan (劳东燕), an outspoken law professor at Tsinghua University, questioned the government’s commitment to personal information protection by pointing out that the country’s billion plus internet users had already been obligated to surrender their personal information to hundreds of sites and apps as a condition of use. There is little hope of protecting this information, she said, if the bulk of it has already been relinquished to private interests.

So unlike US laws that will undeniably worsen privacy, this is a step sideways.

The version of Graphite provided did not include the ability to activate the phone’s microphone or camera…it only enabled its operators access to encrypted communications on the hacked devices

“Only” Is underselling that a bit, I think.Personal messages are smaller and easier to transmit without erasing suspicion, and they’re basically a curated list of things the activists are saying to each other.

there were rumors that there would be a reasonable free backup (ex. up to 1 Gb) with relatively cheap paid options above that. I scrolled through the GitHub link and couldn’t confirm or deny if this is still/actually the case.

There’s no concrete pricing plan, although there were specifics that were originally tied to those rumors.

It has been confirmed that these plans are only test data. They will change before release and were never meant to be actual plans.

You should have looked at my comment history before making a fool of yourself.

Hotznplotzn is not a “good shill” for being on your side. They mix decent sources with abominably inaccurate and pro-surveillance ones.

I guess I’ll ask you the same question I ask Putinists: Do you actually have a problem with propagandists? You get to see Hotznplotzn’s profile too. If you think there’s a different conclusion, a rational person would draw from it, be my guest in elaborate.

It’s also a very funny you would accuse me of being a Putin shill.

I think so.

Some browsers for Android have blocked the abusive JavaScript in trackers. DuckDuckGo, for instance, was already blocking domains and IP addresses associated with the trackers, preventing the browser from sending any identifiers to Meta. The browser also blocked most of the domains associated with Yandex Metrica. After the researchers notified DuckDuckGo of the incomplete blacklist, developers added the missing addresses.

So are Meta’s ties to the US and the MAGA regime.

But for some reason, Hotznplotzn appears more interested in promoting an America First form of nationalism than privacy advocacy, because that interest in privacy evaporates when American entities do it.

OP’s post history demonstrates an interest in only one thing. As one example, look at the way they edited this article’s title.

Original title: “…involving Meta and Yandex…”

This post: “…involving Meta and Russia’s Yandex…”

I continue to wonder if OP is interested in privacy, or is simply upset at the Russianness of this particular thing.