Precisely. This is not what I expect to see on Hacker News. This isn't a discussion of DDG's abilities. It's simply an advertisement.
If this was a link to DDG's contribution page or some kind of information document or review, it would be different. However this just screams "USE THIS SERVICE FOR X REASON!"
This is (IMO) an un-substantive reply to what amounts to fear-mongering. See their previous discussion about issue #1 that tdkl mentioned above (https://github.com/EFForg/privacybadger/issues/266), and you'll see the following comment at the bottom:
> This was discussed in the bi-weekly developers meeting on 9/27.
> Threat model: A local attacker would be able to view a subset of
> cleared history (only visited domains, not urls or times).
> This solution does not actually help against that since the
> attacker could still see if the users has visited site n by taking
> H(n) and searching for it in privacy badger's database.
> what does this stop: an attacker who can view pb data but doesn't
> know how to hash strings.
> other option: respect history clearing events, and remove domains
> from snitch map when they are removed from history.
> problem: this will break privacy badger if the user consistently
> clears their entire history.
So it appears that this is a local list (stored on your filesystem) that could be compromised and show your website history in the case of a local attacker accessing your machine. The "glib" remark to this is that you should be using full-disk-encryption with LUKS and a FOSS operating system as well, so this file shouldn't be exposed because any local attackers would have to defeat your encryption and get your machine to boot first. More realistically: suppose someone has access to this file. What else can a local attacker do on your machine to compromise your privacy? Do you really think they're going to go through a set of scrubbed website history (domains only, not URLs, no timestamps) to somehow ruin your life? If you don't clear your browser history entirely after every session you're exposing way more than this regardless. I fail to see how this is a significant issue in light of the fact that it requires local access to even become a problem.
As for issue #2, the fact that a browser extension (that you probably downloaded from the EFF) links to the EFF is not surprising. They update the do-not-track list, as well as the most recent cookie block list. The code is already coming upstream from the EFF (served from github, or the Chrome store, or the Firefox add-on marketplace, etc). Having to pull in up-to-date lists doesn't sound like the app isn't working as intended. I certainly can't maintain these lists and construct them myself, less so if I nuke all history of using the add-on every time I restart my browser.
Disclaimer: I do not work for EFF, all the information above was through a cursory search through the source on Github and probably doesn't reflect the full story, but the situation is certainly is more nuanced than "PrivacyBadger is secretly trying to undermine your privacy and security". It bothers me that people pull up minor things like this and shoot down projects that are legitimately working to try and make the web a place with less surveillance.
Except a pair-locked iPhone running iMessage is possibly the most secure and private device around - people that do care about their privacy (e.g. the grugq) recommend it.
This isn't a "well suck it up because at least you're getting paid /something/" issue. Chinese workers can still be beneficial to their country and the world while making a decent wage and without being abused.
American entrepreneurs are the best thing that has happened to China in centuries.
If it weren't for American capital, and the American consumer, China would have developed drastically slower (if at all). China's GDP per capita in 1994 was ~$480. That's ~45 years after the Mao revolution.
There was no alternative than to pay them cheap wages to start. If you paid them 'first world' wages, nobody would have set up manufacturing in China to begin with; those manufacturers would have kept that manufacturing domestically or sought out another cheaper source. The sole reason China boomed the last 20 years is that they had 250 million low-wage workers available and willing to do low-cost manufacturing.
If we're talking exploitation, the primary exploiters of cheap Chinese labor, are the 200 Chinese billionaires that have gotten rich off of leveraging their own impoverished workers - they own all the factories, the real estate, et al. China's wealth inequality puts every other country to shame.
> American entrepreneurs are the best thing that has happened to China in centuries.
American business is a significant reason China was so poor to start with. To understand China, I recommend reading what is meant by the 'century of humiliation'.
> There was no alternative than to pay them cheap wages to start.
They can pay less than American-level wages, and yet still pay a living wage and provide safe, reasonable working conditions.
> the primary exploiters of cheap Chinese labor, are the 200 Chinese billionaires
That someone else does wrong doesn't justify doing it yourself. Otherwise, everyone's standard is whatever the worst do.
I just don't understand how anyone could be OK with /anyone/ that takes part in this process. It's not okay for the "200 Chinese billionaires" to be profiting off of abusing others, just as it is not okay for Americans to be giving money to these people.
There is a difference between being successful financially and being able to sleep well at night.
It's like you didn't read his comment, there was no alternative. There would not be a factory, period, if they couldn't pay their workers at lower rates than Americans. It would not be financially feasible. It would lose money and not be able to buy raw materials and then close down and everyone would get paid $0. So when people say they are actually helping them by paying them more than $0 they are telling the truth. And by saying that you could never be part of that process, you are basically saying that you would be one to pay them $0, which is more harmful than the people that build factories.
So you would rather the billions of Chinese regress just so you can sleep well at night?
What is actually happening is good for them, and the majority of them will not side with you or even care how you sleep at night. There will always be casualties and exploitation of workers in China, but that's more due to corruption than it is to systematic underpayment of Chinese workers.
Experience suggests that most people rising to riches don't have any troubles sleeping at night regardless of what they've done. Just world fallacy and all that.
I tend to agree with you, but note that the opposing arguments aren't entirely invalid. Think of how many Africans were better off as slaves in the antebellum South than living as free men and women back home. Did that justify slavery?
There's a fundamental difference since the slaves didn't choose to be slaves, even if better off.
The Chinese factory workers are choosing from the options provided. From their perspective they've been given a better option. From a western first world perspective, people here can't seem to relate to how $3/hr could possibly be a better option, but it is. Over here we have the benefit of minimum wage, welfare, higher standard of living, etc. Unfortunately it is a very egocentric viewpoint to not think of this from the perspective of an actual factory worker.
When I started reading though... it's a neat idea with "meh" execution. It takes round photos and you have to rotate the device to zoom in and focus? What?
It makes sense in a way that the photos would be round, by way of the fact that the screen is circular. Granted, one could scale a rectangular frame within it for previews and while taking a photo, but then you're left with a potentially super tiny window.
The phone looked good but it seems to be made for a market of steampunk fans and cosplayers. Not sure how long it will be around with sales of about 100 per year worldwide at that price.
I think this article touches on many good points, but I can't see Xiaomi makes huge gains in America until they distance themselves from the Chinese government.
They are in the same situation as Lenovo. Not many businesses will use their devices because of security reasons.
If this was a link to DDG's contribution page or some kind of information document or review, it would be different. However this just screams "USE THIS SERVICE FOR X REASON!"