"Google Analytics"

Self host Piwik / Matomo

Brave is at the forefront of browser privacy, bringing fingerprinting shield and tor browser to the non-techies and their (upcoming?) p2p protocol will be so awesome.

I doubt it. 45% of registered republicans supported the actions of demonstrators who stormed the capitol.

https://www.bizpacreview.com/2021/01/08/new-poll-shows-majority-of-republicans-blame-capitol-mayhem-on-biden-1013882/

They have a big national security problem on their hands. There are two main ways they could deal with this.

1. Thoroughly investigate the 2020 election and make real improvements to ensure that people have confidence in the results of future elections. Allow people to have more freedom and stop passing unconstitutional laws.

2. Label anyone who questions the validity of the result a terrorist or potential terrorist. Ruin the lives of demonstrators. Increase domestic surveillance so that if anyone takes it upon himself to water the tree, he can be prevented from taking out anyone too important.

So far it's clear that they prefer option 2.

take your medicine

Surprised/not surprised to see so much China on there.

Hey, maybe he'll listen.

Brave is again at the forefront of privacy protection. It made me aware of finger printing, then added Tor private browsing, and now this!

more bloat, just use ungoogled chromium, hardened ff, icecat, librewolf, pale moon. its filled with bloat and crypto shit.

Buy a Mac (Pro: great user experience with a decent, but definitely not perfect, privacy level. Con: expensive)

fucking kek, kys with this itoy shilling shit

FAGMAN is always spying

DA CHINKZZ

Gotta polish my weapons then.

I hope it doesn't share the same fate as xanadu

Man, do you really like this guy and his explanation as to why signal is unavailable on f droid?

I bought black masking tape (for laptops) and black duct tape (needed on slippery touch screens) just for this purpose. It's much harder for someone to notice, so I don't have to explain myself.

Shut up noob.

Tor Browser. And don't listen to these idiots screaming it's not safe. I can give you multiple sources stating different.

When you log into most corporate laptops, you're greeted with a page of legalese which says the laptop is company property and subject to monitoring at all times. I doubt this widespread practice is illegal aka a lawsuit liability.

Makes me feel less weird to hear that he does it too. I've always done it but it makes me feel like a paranoid weirdo just because no one else I know does it, even though I know I'm right.

But that's how it is with all this privacy stuff. Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean you're not being watched.

The most worrying claim is that some bosses are surreptitiously watching staff via their webcams.

I would hope that this is illegal but maybe not. Company property and all.

I think a lot of people just hadn't heard about it. It didn't get enough publicity. I'm pretty technically literate but didn't really know about it. I mean, I've heard the name before and seen the logo, but I never looked into it until I read your comment. It sounds great. Maybe it could catch on now.

After seeing Zuckerberg tape over his webcam, I started taping over it on everything. If a billionaire tech CEO like Zuckerberg doesn't trust his IT to lock down his machine, no one should.

I wonder which of these web alternatives will "win" and become mainstream. It's interesting seeing them over time, but it's kind of sad that freenet has been doing this for 20 years but never gained any traction.

Who knows, I don't care all that much for what other people do with their time.

The ACLU is wrong here. They have been weakening on free speech issues, and the consequence is that they fall for related fallacies.

Suppose the company simply sold an index of where to find face photos for various people. Suppose someone with this list tripped a web archive like archive.is to store each photo. Suppose another person writes a tool that can pull up the face photo and put it on the left of your screen, leaving you free to compare it to a photo on the right. And suppose lastly you've downloaded and installed a free GPL software program that lets you compare the faces according to biometrics and see if they are the same. Who committed the crime?

Now that is NOT to say I want these bastards tracking faces all over the world. But we must first rule out the impossible before we can focus our attention on what is left. If we can't keep a company from compiling faceprints, what can we do??? Like DUH, we can keep people from USING THEM!

Advantages of building the wall there include the millions of people who will be duped or forced into giving "consent" by countless very important organizations, like employers, who aren't "protected" by the censorship-level restriction.

So what am I saying? Well, I'm saying you can't discriminate against a customer or employee for refusing to be faceprinted, or force them to submit to biometric comparisons. They have to make accommodations. It is at the same level as barring businesses from discriminating by race or even handicap. Americans don't like to think of some punk from the government trying to tell Business who they can do Business with, but there it is. A business that surreptitiously looks up faces to give one person a discount over another should be treated exactly the same - legally and emotionally - as a business that charges higher prices if you are black or female.