@atomicpoet They recently switched over to become more of a search engine if I recall.
Apparently, though, you are more well known than I am.
@majorlinux @atomicpoet It's got me. Accurate enough profile, so far as it goes.
It's a bit disturbing that it's apparently trawled everything I've ever posted, but I'm hardly surprised.
@ApostateEnglishman @majorlinux @atomicpoet That's what I want it to do when I'm asking it a question right? Do the search for me (guessing it's using Bing because of the more accessible API), and summarize the results. LLMs are relatively good at such a task.
@Schouten_B @majorlinux @atomicpoet Lots of folks didn't give their explicit consent to be indexed by search engines, whether traditional or "AI"-powered. They just don't want that, full stop.
No-one is judging you for not caring. You do you! But there are potential safeguarding and consent issues here that are of concern to some other people.
@ApostateEnglishman @majorlinux @atomicpoet If you want content to be private you would put it behind a login or some other kind of access control right? And if a service would then start digging that out and putting it in the public domain that should probably be a crime.
If you're putting up signs in your yard I'm not sure the service recording yard signs and indexing them is doing anything wrong. The service breaking into your home and indexing your letters is.
@Schouten_B @majorlinux @atomicpoet Stop at "If you want..."
It doesn't particularly bother me personally, because I share very little personally-identifying info, and have been salting my online footprint for years. Even those who thought they'd found my real name, were only following the breadcrumb trail I'd very consciously laid for them.
Others may not have realised to what extent "AI" can build up a picture of them, AFK.
@ApostateEnglishman @majorlinux @atomicpoet Yeah. Digital literacy is important.
My approach is to make it very obvious who I am online, and do my best to act like a decent human being. And then we'll see where things go .
And keep private matters private of course rather than putting them out in public :-).
@Schouten_B @ApostateEnglishman @majorlinux @atomicpoet Why? You hate privacy. It's obvious.
@OdinVex @ApostateEnglishman @majorlinux @atomicpoet I have no idea what you are talking about. Sorry.
@Schouten_B @ApostateEnglishman @majorlinux @atomicpoet I was obviously talking about your anti-privacy simping for Google via enshitification of Firefox and your attempt to distract away from Firefox's direction towards becoming a tool for Google. Edit: For my replying that you hate privacy it was a response to the direction your Mozilla has taken but yet you comically post "And keep private matters private of course rather than putting them out in public :-)."
@OdinVex I literally have no idea how Firefox has compromised anyone's 'privacy'. Especially when it comes to private matters. (Even if we're going to assume tracking through TPC you would have to divulge private information to a third party that isn't to be trusted and placed the TPC in the first place)
And even Google doesn't generally compromise anyone's privacy at a level close to many other companies, or the majority of people themselves on social media, for that matter.
"Tech Lead with the Mozilla Performance team" You're flat out lying if you claim to be a part of Mozilla while saying you have now idea how Firefox compromises anyone's privacy. It is entirely unreasonable for you to not know. Everything about Firefox and "privacy" has gotten significantly worse since the early 30s versions from "DNS over HTTPS" trying to funnel everything to Cloudflare to "Safe Browsing" handing over info to Google to Pocket, Search Suggestions (keylogging in realtime, joy), allowing canvasing, fingerprinting, Firefox going out of its way to prevent people from controlling our own overrides for certs, suggestions for "email masks", push notifications, Mozilla's location geo...etc etc etc
"Google doesn't generally compromise anyone's privacy at a level close to many other companies" Again attempting to deflect and draw attention away from Google's spying. Doesn't matter if others do it, Google shouldn't either, and neither should Mozilla.
@OdinVex You do realize traditional DNS gives your DNS requests to everyone who can see your packets right? The point of DoH is that only a single party can see your requests and that you know who that party is and have a contractual relationship with them. (ISPs can supply their own TRRs)
Firefox also has the strictest restrictions on things like timer resolution and data exposure to limit fingerprinting.
Not sure that the 'handing info to Google to Pocket' thing is about.
@Schouten_B @OdinVex « The point of DoH is that only a single party can see your requests and that you know who that party is and have a contractual relationship with them. »
What contractual relationship do you imagine I have with Cloudflare, which is where Firefox apparently wants to send my DNS traffic?
@mathew @OdinVex Cloudflare's privacy policy is public in the ToU, which is legally binding.
But regardless, I would encourage your ISP to provide a TRR for you if you trust them more of course. As a matter of fact I would argue if your ISP -isn't- doing that you probably shouldn't trust them in the first place .
@Schouten_B I don't use Cloudflare and all of my DNS is over TLS to someone I do trust and use, thank you very much. It's not just the defaulting of DoH or the fact Firefox disables enterprise root certificates *every launch* on mobile to prevent users from using their own CAs to encrypt traffic/host their own DoH/CAs to rewrite pages via their own proxies, it's the sheer amount of bull to control our own browser against anti-feature/anti-user-control behavior Mozilla's been morphing Firefox into, a knock-off clone of Chrome.