Apt, never noticed that parallel

It sounds like such hard work to be a member of Gen Z.

As others have said, there are two discrete threat models.

Turning off all the radios (pull out the SIM for good measure) is enough to block any proof of your geographic whereabouts. That absolutely includes wifi. Cell towers are yesterday’s news, geolocation is also done by wifi and GPS and your device will be sharing that with a bunch of third parties if you let it connect.

But there’s a separate issue about what happens if you have to surrender the device. For this scenario, your choice will be between fighting the authorities over the encryption key or presenting a dummy device as your only one.

This radical dualism is partly an American thing. Here on the other side of the pond, most people believe (IMO) that one can be simultaneously a “piece of shit posing as a human being” and a great actor.

Leonardo DiCaprio. I get huge, cringy ‘imposter syndrome’ vibes from him

Exact opposite feelings here, and I generally have a hard time suspending disbelief. I remember seeing The Basketball Diaries (this was before Titanic) and being blown away by his acting. I’d say this is a rare example of an actor being held back by good looks. A lot of folks have just not wanted to admit that this particular heartthrob has genuine talent. To contrast with, for example, Keanu, or Clooney.

Even in a genuine authoritarian state there’s no need to “discard” anything. For these occasions just keep a separate device with plausible data on it, or don’t take one at all.

This discussion breaks community rules, not server rules. The breakage is so flagrant that I don’t know why you’re bothering to argue. Just say you don’t want rules.

I want Lemmy to succeed, do ye not?

Breaks community rule #6 about as flagrantly as is possible.

Boring political groupthink-fest does not belong in this community.

There will be many ways to get an extremely secure OS running on a mobile device. The problem is apps. Specifically, apps that are plugged into corporate clouds, i.e. an absolute ton of them.

The general problem IMO is that people are addicted to mobile computing. The tough form factor and performance specs mean that the hardware is locked down. Which puts free software at a major disadvantage.

The web platform is our last best hope. Keeping it competitive is going to be a political challenge as much as a technical one.

It’s open source (AFAIK or least I certainly hope so). So once published, the bad guys’ work was effectively done for free. Take the win.

This seems less a technical problem than a human one. Specifically, the need to avoid dispersal and fragmentation. If there are 5 different knitting communities, then the real problem is that there are 3 or 4 too many knitting communities and they should merge.

By that standard every community from gardening to history will be overrun with techie talk. Makes no sense.

If a generalist community is a bit less busy but on-topic, I call that a win. Communities should be built on shared interests and normies will never be interested in this subject.

This super geeky and technical question does not belong in a generalist community.

PS: sure, I’ll get downvoted, but consider the possibility of selection bias. If you’re reading this thread, you clicked out of interest. How many others scrolled past “X86/X64 arm blablabla” while subconsciously noting “Lemmy = tech talk”?

Why do you keep talking about the .ml communities? It’s irrelevant. We’re not on an .ml community.

To repeat one last time: You’re not going to fix the problem you care about in .ml communities by creating a bias problem on Sopuli.

Since you didn’t read very closely, or perhaps at all, I will put it in simpler terms: two wrongs don’t make a right.

You’re not going to fix the bias problem in .ml communities by creating a bias problem in the China community.

Of course I addressed that:

As you say explicitly here, you think that the cure to partiality in one community is partiality in another community.

That is the way information works in authoritarian societies - places like China and Russia. Truth does not exist so it’s pointless looking for it. There’s just propaganda on one side and propaganda on the other.

You’re helping to make the China community into the mirror image of what you so hate. The opposite of “no different viewpoints” is not “no different viewpoints on the other side”. It’s different viewpoints.

I’ve never denied that you post from generally reliable sources. The problem is the partiality. As you say explicitly here, you think that the cure to partiality in one community is partiality in another community.

That is the way information works in authoritarian societies - places like China and Russia. Truth does not exist so it’s pointless looking for it. There’s just propaganda on one side and propaganda on the other.

It won’t work in free societies where people are accustomed to hearing different viewpoints. Sophisticated information consumers can easily detect efforts at manipulation. They will switch off and go elsewhere. IMO this one reason the China community is so empty. If you want to influence people, as you seem to do, the only way to do it is by trust. By convincing them that you’re genuinely interested in finding the truth. That means posting some positive or neutral stories about China - because, after all, you don’t really believe that nothing positive or neutral ever happens in China, do you?

Anyway, I’ve said enough for today. Others will judge for themselves. Once again, I agree with you about China’s politics. But what you’re trying to do by flooding that community with constant repetition of the same negative stories - it’s not working, for the reasons just outlined. You’re damaging this whole project and wasting your own time.

Mea culpa. That post was cross-posted to the China community and I thought I was replying there.

In the Privacy community it is entirely appropriate to criticize China relentlessly. In the China community, it is not.

This is what you refuse to understand. I don’t know if you care or not, but I agree with you about China’s government. You will see that from my posts here and elsewhere.

But I also want these discussion forums to succeed. To attract new members, communities must stay on-topic and cover a variety of viewpoints about their subject.

The topic of that community is “China”. It is not the “Communist Party of China” or “privacy”.

By ignoring this, you’re stopping that community from succeeding. And it’s even worse than that: by helping to create an off-topic community frequented by a handful of members who already agree with you, you’re ensuring that you reach nobody new, that you persuade nobody with your ideas (which, again, I agree with). Your wasting everyone else’s time and your own too. It’s sad and unnecessary.