• 0 Posts
  • 43 Comments
Joined 6 days ago
cake
Cake day: January 2nd, 2025

help-circle






  • Work is for work, not for political bullshit.

    Political bullshit is alway divisive, and we all work too damn hard to build cohesive teams.

    I’ve seen it many times - if you’re one of those that is compelled to bring outside bullshit to work, where we have enough actual related issues to contend with, you’ll be left behind. People won’t want to work with you, I because you’re not a team player and more interested in discussing political crap (or reality TV crap, or whatever) than discussing the very real issues in front of us.

    We already don’t have enough time for the tasks at hand, last thing we need is such juvenile nonsense.

    You want to talk politics, do it on your break, away from me.

    And your freedom of speech bullshit argument is nothing more than a sophistry tactic known as a strawman. This reveals you to be a sophist, not interested in discovering truth, but rather in winning an argument.

    You even led with castigating me, and continued on with denigrating.

    You should probably revisit your intentions and ethics.



  • So you have nothing to hide, eh?

    Read more here.

    These tvs, like smartphones, track lots of stuff. And the databases they feed make all sorts of inferences.

    They even scan what you’re watching from other sources and can determine what show it is, and report that info too.

    They know when you’re home and leave, to some extent.

    I’ve read of patents for wifi tech in tvs that will connect to other TVs of the same brand for a connection if you don’t set one up.

    They definitely use their own DNS, and probably have some hard coded IPs so you can’t block them phoning home via DNS (I’ve tested this myself). I can see this traffic even when I setup DNS blocks - they still hit the vendor’s service IPs (looking at you, Samsung).

    These companies are openly antagonistic and adversarial to us, and you “have nothing to hide”?




  • Thanks for this - a reasoned, easy-to-grasp explanation of missions, without a lot of technical jargon.

    It’s this kind of writing that’s needed (from any technical field) for those not in that field to understand it. I’m in IT, and work diligently to provide this kind of explanation to decision-makers. It’s not easy, when in your head you see all the “but this” at the technical level. We have to sacrifice high-resolution detail to provide a “good enough” image for people to comprehend. Sometimes that means being “technically inaccurate” - which then gets unnecessarily criticised.

    I wish magazines like Scientific American (which has seriously gone down hill) wrote like this more.