Frontend DogmaPlease Stop Externalizing Your Costs Directly Into My Face, by @sir:
https://drewdevault.com/2025/03/17/2025-03-17-Stop-externalizing-your-costs-on-me.html
| Home Page | https://matthewcodes.com/ |
Matt McMahon
@AffableMatt
- 3 Followers
- 98 Following
- 54 Posts
@cuchaz You're just wrong. Please read the proposal.
1.) DAP is a hell of a lot better then "a little more privacy-preserving". The only user identifying data a service could possible get is an IP address (and that's only if your browser allows unproxied Aggregation Services).
2.) Your "big-red-button" is wish-casting. If you want to stop the arms race you need to incentivize disarmament. DAP does just that while keeping any "tracking" local and entirely under your control.
@cuchaz it would be better if you were joking. Just reading through the proposal, the "tracking" information Firefox is allowing "adtech right in the front door" to recieve is limited to reports like the following:
Some large number of people (I'm not telling you who they were) saw ad X, and then went to website Y and did something of interest.
If widely adopted the DAP Proposal would be a huge win for privacy and return significantly more control to users.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ppm-dap#name-security-considerations
Distributed Aggregation Protocol for Privacy Preserving Measurement
There are many situations in which it is desirable to take measurements of data which people consider sensitive. In these cases, the entity taking the measurement is usually not interested in people's individual responses but rather in aggregated data. Conventional methods require collecting individual responses and then aggregating them, thus representing a threat to user privacy and rendering many such measurements difficult and impractical. This document describes a multi-party distributed aggregation protocol (DAP) for privacy preserving measurement (PPM) which can be used to collect aggregate data without revealing any individual user's data.
Teri KanefieldWell.
@StephanieJones is on a roll. Instead of reposting each of her substack pieces, I'll just send you here:
https://stephaniejones2.substack.com
I've mentioned Stephanie a few times. I've tried to get her to be more active here, but she really doesn't do much on social media.
Adding: She is very accomplished. There is no room here for her resume. Among other things she served on the Congressional committee investigating the J6 attack.
When my editor read the mansucript for my book coming out next spring on the Bill of Rights, he said, "This helps me understand what's been in the news."
IOW, the way to understand the news is not to listen to pundits, get confused, and then look for explainers.
The way to understand current events is to understand law and history.
I think what I will write over the next year will be more interesting and enlightening then if I spend time debunking the latest outrage.
12.
Here is Stephanie P. Jones' take on SCOTUS's decision to grant cert in the immunity case.
(She gets annoyed at a few of the influential TV lawyers.)
@thadd 5 justices granting a stay was remote.
Remote doesn't mean impossible.
I was not part of their meetings. I am not a mind reader.
People can speculate on what they are thinking and why, but it is pure speculation.
Because they have ruled against immunity in lesser instance (like executive privilege) I don't expect them to grant immunity. They had opportunities before now to do so.
Why they want oral arguments, I don't know and neither does anyone else.
The marketing department has spoken. (I didn't even make a pitch)
Rebels, Robbers, and Radicals: The Story of the Bill of Rights
To be published by Abrams Books for Young Readers in spring 2025.
Adding: I could veto it, but you know what? I like it!
Puzzle In A Thunderstorm#ScathingAtheist 562 Diatribe by Noah Lugeons (11/23/23)
🔊: https://audioboom.com/posts/8405235-dos-and-don-ts-edition
Dos and Don'ts Edition
In this week’s episode, we try to stuff a show with prerecorded stuff and come up a bit short, making us one of the few instances where there were too few Thanksgiving leftovers.
I moved to Mastodon.socialAdding one more comment:
The court left wide open the possibility that the appellate court may find that Trump was an officer.
Sort of humbly, the court didn't think it should be the one to make the call.
I think that Colorado certainly has the right to keep Trump off the ballot. I also think that these court proceedings would satisfy due process.
So we'll see.
7/