[dead]
Re:Candidates for Mozilla's IRC Successor
by partialrecall on Thursday September 12, 2019 @12:51AM
(#20948108)
> Then say that
What, say this "The facebooks, twitters, linkedins (same owner as github) etc of the world." instead of "social media"? Why? To be needlessly verbose for fun and kicks? No thanks.
> "tinfoil hatter."
Well screw you too I guess? I don't appreciate your characterization at all.
Re:Candidates for Mozilla's IRC Successor
by dpark on Thursday September 12, 2019 @12:56AM
(#20948136)
> What, say this "The facebooks, twitters, linkedins (same owner as github) etc of the world." instead of "social media"? Why? To be needlessly verbose for fun and kicks? No thanks.
No. The “internet companies who turn user data into an asset“ part. i.e. Something concrete about your criticism rather than point to an extremely vague category. I think you could probably be more specific still, but at least now I have an idea what you don’t like about “social media” and why you don’t apply that criticism to IRC.
>I have no idea why you think browsers are a tool to facilitate surveillance to a greater extent than dedicated clients.
Because that's simply factually the case? IRC networks do not give my IRC client proprietary tracking scripts to run. With an IRC client if any third party code execution occurs, it's due to an exploit in the client. On the other hand with web browsers, servers sending malicious scripts for the browser to run is par for the course.
Typical modern web browsers (even Mozilla's own) are total disasters, particularly in their default configuration. Why the hell aren't they shipping with resist-fingerprinting turned on by default? Because it would mildly inconvenience some users, and despite all their good intentions and positive words, they still prioritize user perception of convenience over privacy.