CERESUltra

Andréa, Canis Lanonbinary

@CERESUltra

Music Nerd, Author, Yote!

  • She/they/it

30s/white/tired/coyote/&
Words are my favorite stim toy

log inask
CERESUltra
@CERESUltra
GingerlyBreadArt
@GingerlyBreadArt
funcitonretrun
@funcitonretrun

i think there is an option missing from this unsolicited popup, google!

the missing option, in case you were wondering, is

No

an acceptable alternative would be

No. Never ask me to provide irrevocable biometric identifying information to an organisation that is legally able - and fiduciarily obliged - to retain it indefinitely and extract maximum value from it using any and all techniques available in any current or future technical, regulatory and/or sociocultural environment, as well as any other organisations or individuals obtaining this information by means of trade, regulatory requirement, legal proceedings, theft, espionage or negligence.

but i guess that's a little wordy for a CTA

qualia
@qualia
This page's posts are visible only to users who are logged in.
log in
You must log in to comment.

in reply to @funcitonretrun's post:

funcitonretrun
@funcitonretrun

it's a war on two fronts.

hot war on the technical battlefields: youtube vs. ublock origin/yt-dlp/et al., android vs. jailbreakers & technical phone users, microsoft vs. technical windows users, the list goes on

cold war at the surface layer: slowly eroding the public concepts of data ownership, device ownership, privacy, general purpose computing itself. opt-in becomes opt-out becomes kill-it-with-group-policy. new applications purchased on physical media - requiring an actual value proposition - become automatically-updated apps/ad-supported 'free' online services become subscriptions. it's important for their purposes that the language around computing evolve away from the unambiguous No. everything moves towards a subscription model where their revenue stream is predictable and their control is absolute. there is no concept of No as a meaningful option within their ideal, so it is being deprecated.

login to reply

in reply to @qualia's post:

Exameter
@Exameter

face ID skeeves me the fuck out, but I learned that ultrasonic fingerprint scanners on phones cannot really produce data that's actually useful for anything external to that exact scanner. The data can't really be reversed to produce a fingerprint, and the data it does produce can't really be compared against data taken from a different one either.

It's why you can't just transfer over your fingerprint data when migrating to a new phone, and why if you replace the sensor you'll have to re-register your prints. Even two samples of the same model of the kind of scanners they use will apparently throw out a completely different hash from the same fingerprint because of variance in manufacturing. It's certainly not intentional so much as just an inherent aspect of that design of readers, and reference-quality calibration is way too expensive to put into mass circulation.

this might be out of date though, and I might be misunderstanding it. It's just the specific thing that makes me just willing enough to accept the risks of using it for the convenience.

login to reply
Pinned Tags