How it’s been going.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QbBc3Oduc8

I see, thanks!

Thanks Dessalines!

Fascinating, didn’t know moderators could investigate such things effectively (I was unaware of any mod tool that made that easy to do).

Its early so I only had time to take a cursory glance and the vote counts were still looking the same to me - which one had the votes removed after your report?

Good to hear nonetheless, definitely felt something was up, thanks!

To make it clear what I am talking about - I would expect any voting distribution for 16 votes to be at least semi-random on a controversial comment, in example such as this:

However, the distribution as it occurred looked like this on the first 16 votes:

A controversial comment will have such a ratio, but any comment controversial or not will almost never have this kind of distribution unless there are multiple accounts waiting for vote up events to occur so that they can send a vote down.

I can believe this happening 2, 3, even 4 times by chance, but not 8 times.

I’m entirely aware, I’m specifically referencing my top level comment which at the time had no replies.

Additionally, what you are describing does not explain both a vote up and vote down, occurring at the same time 8 times consecutively, so I’m not quite sure I understand what your point is as what actions occurred prior to hitting the button doesn’t enter into what I’m describing as far as I can determine.

Even if people read a thread before scrolling back up and hitting the up or down button, them hitting that button at the same time as someone else hitting the opposing button 8 times in a row within a few moments of each other is still a statistical anomaly.

See my other comment in which I graphed what I am talking about in order to better explain myself.

As I said, certainly possible, I was just surprised by the distribution over time, not the distribution of vote type.

Yes, it’s true that some good things have been added, I suppose my concern is just that I feel the negative things in the case of firefox hold greater weights when compared to the positive things they have done.

As a euphemism; a cruise ship adding a bowling alley, better seating, and fine art to its interior is neat and might make it look better and more convenient but it doesn’t mean much to me if they also added an engine which spews 50% more pollution into the atmosphere and poisons me.

Certainly possible but I’m sure the odds are astronomically low. After I saw this happen 3 times I started refreshing every minute and each time there was a change, both counts had increased, and this happened 8 times in a row. I could see a distribution happening of something like a vote up at minute 2, vote down at minute 3 vote up at minute 12, vote down at minute 20, etc, but this was - vote up and vote down at minute 5, same thing at minute 11, same thing at minute 16, etc, 8 times concurrently (the minutes listed here are an example, I wasn’t tracking exact time between events).

All I intend to say is that if I left when Mozilla thought it was a good idea to have an advertising company become involved in the development of their products and started tracking users without their consent (even if less invasively than cookies) with PPA, then surely I am not the only one who left.

This is a company that has previously sideloaded an extension into the browser without user permissions because of a marketing deal they made with a television show. As a result, I’m afraid im less concerned with the not-yet implemented features they may be working on or the features they have in place when there are a litany of other browsers available which don’t fuck around with user permissions and privacy for advertising deals.

If I wanted a browser for tab grouping and UI stuff, I’d move to vivaldi, but at the moment firefox just doesn’t seem to have the best UI or the best security and both of those are directly related to Mozilla’s choices.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion and it is valid, but I think that my criticisms are also valid and are not baseless.

Perhaps if they made decisions like this more often in recent times there would be more people there when they do good stuff.

Edit: Cool to see someone botting this thread as well. I have now watched on three separate occasions someone vote up on mine and others comments only for a vote down to be applied within 10 seconds - 5 minutes in lockstep each time. This was in the first 15 minutes of the comment being posted.

2nd Edit. I’ve watched it happen 8 times now actually. I wonder what the odds are that over the course of ~2 hours there is exactly 8 people who agree and exactly 8 who don’t who keep showing up within moments of one another.

When faced with a firearm or a knife, any self respecting martial artist will tell you the one technique that will save your life.

Running the fuck away and or taking cover.

When it comes to hand to hand combat, understanding the dynamics of how to protect yourself and control the opposer like in Jiu Jitsu is very useful and can also potentially save your life.

But no, if they have a weapon of any kind, get the fuck out of there.

I think it may depend on where you are. Back when Whatsapp went belly up, myself, my entire family, and every other person I know IRL switched over to signal within a week, so I think it may be more popular than you expect, though still not as popular as Telegram as you noted.

So you said the government would buy it, so I pointed out that the government already has a facial picture of you. Your counterpoint is that it doesn’t have to be the government, in which case, why did you mention it.

I said “government” would be a likely purchaser, not “the” government because I am not talking about any one government. I mentioned it to reinforce the point that any government is a potential buyer for the data, not just the government that has your ID on file, which is counter point to the point you tried to make that “the government already has a facial picture of you” referring to ID when this is not the case for all governments.

As a hypothetical example, I have never been to, or interacted with the government of South Africa. I doubt they have a picture of me. They could likely buy the data if they wanted to, which would give them a picture of me in the hypothetical scenario. They would not otherwise have access to a photo of me. I don’t know what is hard to follow about that.

And then you said it’s because it would have meta data on your location, which is weird considering you would have bought tickets with your name on them through payment methods tied to your name.

Yea, and my credit card which I buy the ticket with over the internet does not have a picture of my face with a timestamp verifiably showing that I was at the location, what I was wearing, who I may be with, etc.

You also understand that you can buy things with this neat thing called “Cash” right? Cash is really neat because it’s a payment method that doesn’t have your name on it.

This is my direct counter point to your statement “you would have bought tickets with your name on them through payment methods tied to your name”. Unless you want to deny the existence of physical money, you are plainly wrong here for reasons that are ibid.

You also know that tickets don’t typically have your name printed on them right?

https://dygtyjqp7pi0m.cloudfront.net/i/24230/22003478_1.jpg?v=8D2410658E1E630

You can go buy a ticket and examine it as close as you like. It is uncommon for them to have your name one them unless they are for some event you have been explicitly invited to, or you ordered them in advance for pick up or through some third party service.

Probably because the public is free to buy tickets for shows AT the location the event is held? And probably because you don’t have to show ID to buy such tickets unless you’re purchasing liquor with it or seeing an event rated for adults etc? Do they ask for your ID when you go to the ticket office at the movie theater? Cool, they don’t at ticket offices at stadiums either, so if someone has been asking you for that when you buy tickets, you should probably check if your identity was stolen because that’s not a requirement to get a ticket!

It’s almost like you could buy a ticket without your name printed on it using a method of payment which also doesn’t have your name printed on it. What a wild idea! It’s almost as if this is how this universally worked before people had debit/credit cards.

Oh and if it’s a cashless location, there’s another really cool thing you can do called “buying a gift card with cash” which gives you a cashless payment method without giving your name and face away which you can also use to purchase tickets as well as food and drink.

Didn’t realize a picture of my face was on my football ticket as well.

Doesn’t need to be your government who’s buying. The picture on your license also doesn’t come with meta data about your whereabouts when you decide to go to something as simple as a sporting event.

Biometric data of individuals faces. Biggest buyer for that market would be law enforcement/government I’d expect.

To database and sell your biometric data at the expense of privacy under the guise of convenience. This is contemporary business 101. First either steal data or lie through a grinning face to acquire data, then sell the data.

Wow good job Spain.

I guess this works because email doesn’t exist.

I guess this works because file sharing applications and websites don’t exist.

I guess this works because VPN’s free and paid don’t exist.

I guess this works because Tor, i2p, Freenet, and Yggdrasil don’t exist.

I guess this works because torrenting doesn’t exist.

I guess this works because black markets don’t exist.

I guess this works because chat applications don’t exist.

To be a fly on the wall of these government meetings where they talk about this shit would surely be the funniest fucking thing in the world.

True but it also depends on where you go. In Canada for example, this detail is explicitly taught to anyone who goes through the process of getting a firearms license.