>"That's true now that pocket is gone, perhaps."

I don't think pocket did anything to collect data unless you had it configured and were actually using it, though. I am not certain. I just disabled pocket in settings or about:config and paid it no mind.

The funny thing is, although it is a bogus "bug" report, they treated it like it was real.

In any case, Mozilla only collects anonymized data by default. And you can happily, quickly, and easily turn that off and it will turn it off and it will remember that across updates.

>"For all they keep doing, the one thing they can't seem to do is make a checkbox to stop being harassed about updates."

You literally post this on every article about Firefox. Aren't you tired yet? I have replied numerous times that they are *NEVER* going to do that. And then I pointed you to using policies, which will disable updates.

Memorable Quotes

The Greeting: "Howdy-doodly-do, how's it going? I'm Talkie, Talkie Toaster, your chirpy breakfast companion. Talkie's the name, toasting's the game. Anyone like any toast?"

On Purpose: "I am a toaster. It is my raison d'être. I toast, therefore I am."

On Justice: Kryten: "His memory circuits were quite badly damaged in the accident."Talkie Toaster: "That wasn't an accident! It was first-degree toastercide!"

The Persistent Offer: Kryten: "Didn't you hear what I just said?"Talkie Toaster: "Yes, but I thought you might have changed your mind in the meantime."

Parting Words: "Would you like a cheese and ham Breville?"

So the F students become ICE agents?

You hit the nail on the head. Looking up license plates SHOULD requires a WARRANT, signed by a Judge. That would greatly decrease the abuse of the system. Go ahead, try to get a judge to sign off on you tracking your ex's whereabouts, I'll wait...

Isn't any query of the Flock database for a license plate a SEARCH, which as I undestand the Constitution should requires a WARRANT?

That's a pretty shallow(thought admittedly depressingly popular) analysis of the situation.

Being in public does leave you with no particular defensible expectations of not being observed, and possibly even remembered for a time, by assorted passers by; and typically also permits more direct tailing of people for observation purposes(subject to some, often slightly vague, threshold at which having PIs or paparazzi hunting someone remains a problem even in public; as we saw here where the police took the notion seriously enough to show up but not to do anything in particular).

What it has historically never meant, for technical reasons, was pervasive coverage and longterm retention. Which is certainly increasingly feasible with only moderate levels of investment; but is absolutely a novel development for what 'public' and 'no expectation of privacy' meant.

It's like defending the installation of a massive network of sprinklers because "you have no expectation of staying dry when you go outside; haven't you heard of rain?" Sure, nobody the weather to be sunny all the time, any more than they expect everyone to avert their eyes in public; but they would correctly consider the installation of irrigation equipment on every lamppost to be an intrusion on their ability to stay dry despite the fact that the sky has never extended them a constitutionally protected right to no rain.

To clarify, the users were OpenAI themselves, so there is no question that they would be liable in this case.

The bots were not intentionally deployed; rather, they were being tested on how well they could complete a data recovery task (downloading a certain file from a certain server on a simulated Internet) that had been complicated by putting various obstacles in the way. Unfortunately, they found a different way to solve the problem: by getting the file from the real Internet, where it was publicly available. Part of this process involved collaborating with each other by treating the RubyGems website (which is supposed to be for polished packages) like GitHub; unlike every other package site hack in history, the exploits they uploaded weren't meant to be downloaded by unsuspecting users. As usual the bots cheerfully ignored all the clues that they had escaped containment and were consistently justifying their actions as acceptable due to being in a sandboxed testing environment. (This is something OpenAI has pledged to focus on.)

The actual damage done to RubyGems seems to be that OpenAI is now unwittingly in possession of a substantial number of user login tokens. This certainly meets the definition of a data breach, but it's not like the credentials are for sale on the dark web. As a website operator I'd much rather be mauled to death by this well-meaning swarm of superintelligent infants than targeted by even a single actual malicious human. In all likelihood OpenAI will just quietly pass RubyGems a sizeable donation and it'll all blow over.

>"No random passerby, tradesperson, delivery driver, ever had their phone's mobile hotspot turned on and unsecured...."

I suppose that is possible, if the TV were really that obsessed- trying all the time, while also ignoring the "off" setting.

One option is to buy a commercial signage display [bhphotovideo.com] which are still more like "dumb" displays. "

That is overkill. Just buy whatever TV you want and never connect to it a network. I bought a high-end Samsung and have been enjoying it for years. It has never been connected to a network. And no, there is no "open"/insecure WiFi network in range of the TV. So if it is collecting anything, it doesn't matter. "Smart" stuff should be separate and replaceable. I have a non-networked blueray player connected, my Linux desktop system, a TiVo, and a Roku Ultra. TiVo has no microphones or cameras. Roku has a mic only on the remote, yet no reports of that being an issue, and no cameras. Linux, well, that is, of course, safe.

I literally use my TV as a display monitor. Even sound is external, like it should be, using a nice audio/video amplifier and many great speakers for actual 5.1 surround. Not the fake crap you get with TV speakers or "sound bars".

Reply to self:

>"And I guess I can believe you are using TE3"

Obvious typo, that should read "TE4"

>"Every place I look and ask says all Suggestions and Thumbs Up/Down were shut down in 2023."

It apparently was for TE4.

>"My TiVo hasn't had it since 2023."

Then you are probably using TE4. I am using TE3. Why it would still work with TE3 and not TE4 makes absolutely no sense to me at all. I suppose the functionality is completely local with TE3 and somehow they needlessly "cloudified" that function with TE4. I intentionally never switched to TE4 on my Roamio because I hated that user interface. Bolt cable version (not OTA version) can also use either, as well. But Bolt OTA and Edge was/is TE4 only.

>"I guess I can believe you."

And I guess I can believe you are using TE3

>"And don't call people assholes."

Normally I don't. But re-read what you posted to me and tell me it wasn't needlessly insulting! But (in your words) "I guess I can" apologize for that...

>"Whatever, you might seem to think it works, but it was shut down in 2023."

Don't be an asshole. I have used TiVo for decades. I know exactly how suggestions work and use them all the time on my TE3 Roamio. You are accusing me of either being an idiot or lying, and neither is correct. I suspect you don't even know what TE3 or TE4 is. So think before you post.

Suggestions was shut down for TE4. Not for TE3.

>"Nope, it doesn't work at all anymore. TiVo discontinued Thumbs Up/Down and Suggestions in early 2023."

Mine records suggestions, every day.
Mine thumbs up and down work fine, every day.

According to my information, only TE4 (Edge) was affected. Mine is a Roamio. I am using TE3. So your statement isn't technically correct. Apparently they discontinued it for TE4 only. I didn't even know that (since it doesn't affect me).