ganymede

joined 4 years ago
[–] ganymede@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children)

Of course a researcher is never sure something is 100% ruled out. That’s part of how academic research works.

once again, that isn't what they were reported to have said. [and researchers don't need to repeat the basic precepts of the scientific method in every paper they write, so perhaps its worthwhile to note what they were reported to say about that, rather than write it off as a generic 'noone can be 100% certain of anything'] it's a bit rich to blame someone for lacking rigor while repeatedly misrepresenting what your own article even says.

what the article actually said is

because there are some scenarios not covered by their study

and even within the subset of scenarios they did study, the article notes various caveats of the study:

Their phones were being operated by an automated program, not by actual humans, so they might not have triggered apps the same way a flesh-and-blood user would. And the phones were in a controlled environment, not wandering the world in a way that might trigger them: For the first few months of the study the phones were near students in a lab at Northeastern University and thus surrounded by ambient conversation, but the phones made so much noise, as apps were constantly being played with on them, that they were eventually moved into a closet

there's so much more research to be done on this topic, we're FAR FAR from proving it conclusively (to the standards of modern science, not some mythical scientifically impossible certainty).

presenting to the public that is a proven science, when the state of research afaict has made no such claim is muddying the waters.

if you're as absolutely correct as you claim, why misrepresent whats stated in the sources you cite?

[–] ganymede@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (6 children)

no, they don’t

Please be careful with your claims.

In my experience, whenever investigating these claims and refutations we usually find when digging past the pop media headlines into the actual academic claims, that noone has proven it’s not happening. If you know of a conclusive study, please link.

Regarding the article you have linked we don’t even need to dig past the article to the actual academic claims.

The very article you linked states quite clearly:

The researchers weren’t comfortable saying for sure that your phone isn’t secretly listening to you in part because there are some scenarios not covered by their study.

(Genuine question, not trying to be snarky) Will you take a moment to reflect on which factors may have contributed to your eagerness to misrepresent the conclusions of the studies cited in your article?

[–] ganymede@lemmy.ml -3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (10 children)

Anyone saying they know for 100% certain it's not happening is probably speaking from their emotional desire for it not to be true - rather than actual fact.

Anyone who has looked into the actual technical aspects, rather than spouting the usual surface-level "tech facts" or parroting headlines (rather than the actual academic findings), cannot seriously claim to know for certain its 100% not happening.

@op i would advise caution on stating '24x7' until there is evidence of that specific claim. (unless you're referring to while voice assistants are enabled.)

[–] ganymede@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

this is a complex topic and probably belongs in a different thread.

essentially i don't personally believe in punishing citizens of a country for the actions of its politicians.

at best its misguided, at worse it basically empowers politicians on both sides who draw power from friction between citizens of different nations. typical divide and conquer bs.

why do you not think a software developer wouldn’t have to

wouldn't or shouldn't? if you mean wouldn't, it's not surprising and its not the dev's fault they have to comply with policy, so the criticism is not with them.

if you mean shouldn't, i don't agree with punishing athletes either, but regarding foss specifically, isn't the "friendly competition" of olympics equivalent to that? sort of. in some ways yes. in other ways its actually the opposite.

collaboration is actually the opposite of competition.

and while there's a case for the benefits of healthy sports competition, i don't believe it truly fulfills the spirit of international goodwill to the degree it says on the packaging. foss and other forms of international collaboration for the betterment of greater society are definitely on a higher rung - in my opinion at least.

[–] ganymede@lemmy.ml 41 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (9 children)

personally i don't agree with sanctioning foss communities.

but fuckit, bring on more forks i say.

among other benefits, the scifi-type scenario of nations trying to patch eachothers backdoors and slip in new backdoors (and hopefully innovations). could make for an exciting OS space-race type scenario

[–] ganymede@lemmy.ml 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

its BIG. could be great to see some different teams tackle different issues.

for example a transcode team to tag and convert different media to the latest efficient formats might save alot of space.

and eg. voice-only recordings could be suitably encoded vs music etc

also some methods for diffing snapshots, or some kind of compromise on snapshots storage with minimal changes? not ideal but might be enough to get across the line maybe?

re. the "most important", aside from specific items or archives, imo a crucial role might be text-only snapshots of most of the web. would help increase accountability amongst modern media outlets, journalists etc

[–] ganymede@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

incredible! can you please describe it a little more, how it worked and especially what the jets did and how that was pleasant vs being bombarded in an unpleasant way. what type of stream was coming out of the jets?

[–] ganymede@lemmy.ml 10 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

reddit is a cesspit, on reddit it used to be that misinformation or incompetency cope would be promptly identified, now its the top 5 comments on any thread...and the next 5 are circle jerks.

in other words: welcome reddit refugees. please please feel free to leave the reddit mindset at the door on your way in :)

[–] ganymede@lemmy.ml 7 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (1 children)

How do you benefit from clinging to an untruth?

OP is objectively and demonstrably incorrect in a number of their claims. So your question is quite valid. Are they in sheer denial and this is a certain flavor of cope? Or are they actually intentionally spreading propaganda?

[–] ganymede@lemmy.ml 36 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (5 children)

Glad to see they've adjusted for inflation, have they also adjusted for cost of living?

Edit: For anyone (such as OP) who is confused by these terms:

The difference between inflation and cost of living.

[–] ganymede@lemmy.ml 77 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (21 children)

well yeah most of its operating software was derived from opensource projects, but capitalists exploited those opensource project without giving the tinest bit back, so...

view more: ‹ prev next ›