google going bankrupt in 251 years time

Ahh fucking hell, we really could’ve used that 1 million dollars from the auto-delete lawsuit back in ‘023 now.

Settings -> account settings

You guys have Zero Cool 😎

People still use SMS?

I don't get it, should video conferences always be recorded and stored? For how long? should all meetings be recorded?

Why is it okay to pop down the hall and talk to your co-worker but you can't ask the same question over chat?

It seems like the government is basically asking Google to record all conversations between employees and keep them indefinitely which is quite a reach.

How about text messages between executives? How long should they be retained? What about when to executives are editing a google doc? Should the whole history of all the edits for every document be retained indefinitely?

signal is my goto messenger, and will continue to be.

it really irritates me that for work purposes fucking whatsapp has assumed the default position for messaging - although more and more people are on signal now.

governments have no business poking into our lives by limiting or weakening encryption.

It's under the privacy tab in user settings

Windows 11, aka Windows Fail

But you DO need to trust what they're doing, unless you take the steps you mentioned.

>Google was notified

Actually, they weren't. The US is saying that Google should have expected it, but they never notified Google until much later.

You can't offer a back door without risk that others will use it.

If you produce messages that can be read by two keys, the recipient or key XYZ which is held by the UK government then anyone who gets that XYZ key can decrypt every message.

On top of that, the politics of back doors are just too problematic. If you give the UK a back door then Russia can come to you and demand one too. Any government, by establishing a precedent that they get a back door opens up to services giving access to their enemies too.

Wait, how do you flag your account to not be listed in searches engines?

No need to trust signals words, the source code is open source. You can know how every bit of data is processed for the version you are using and in what format it leaves the device.

If you don't trust the Play Store app distribution (which ideally you should not trust), compile the app from source nd you have complete control of the app as if you yourself have made the app for yourself.

Even signal can't themselves do anything fishy. The can almost give government most basic information like which time my app connect to them nd my ip because I connected to their servers.

TLDR It's not based on propriety model where you need to trust the app for what it is doing.

With signal complete privacy is in users hands and the message are encrypted when leaving the app. It's not possible for signal servers to know message content by design.

Yea, any chance they get to complain about Samsung they always do. Super easy to customize, you can download a goodlock module to take the button customization even further. Can't do that on an iPhone or a Pixel.

r/ChoosingBeggars

Oh yea, it's absolutely more trustworthy than Whatsapp

I really like Signal but the main issue is, my work laptop can only download apps that are the in the app store, so cant install Signal ! I really wish it had a web app similar to WhatsApp.

There is no domestic task I want a robot to do. I enjoy cooking, listening to music during light cleaning, and while I wash and dry dishes or the few clothes I wash I listen to radio and daydream. Take away some of the simple chores and what do you have? Maybe it can read to me and make me a whiskey Manhattan but i enjoy those things, too. Fuck off robots.

SMS lol. how quaint.

The difference is that signal is open source, whatsapp is not. Signal you can verify their encryption, whatsapp you just have to blindly trust.

I'm pretty sure Australia already makes google pay in the exact same way.

EDIT: After double checking the wording it seems like its even just the linked search results - which doesn't make sense to me - search engines increase traffic to websites, if anything news sites should be paying google for its huge audience.

The most i would agree to is that search engines should pay for content if they summarize the web pages content in such away that the user no longer needs to follow the link to the original source, reducing site traffic

Trudeau has no clue what he is doing.

So Canadian news networks want google to pay them, to advertise for them? Am i missing something, because this is insane troll logic.

This is a perfect example of politicians legislating on things they clearly don't understand

>“It really surprises me that Google has decided that they’d rather prevent Canadians from accessing news than actually paying journalists for the work they do,” Trudeau said.

Really? He's surprised a company isn't willing to pay to provide a service to another?

Every website on the internet has the power to not be listed on search engines, hell as a redditor you can even flag your account to not be listed on search engines, and yet all of these news orgs still choose to be listed without needing to be paid for the privilege. Because it benefits them.

Government again not understanding how the internet works.