shutitalldown, my point btw was that jan-jaap commented on the use of XP, presumably with respect to security issues, and your response was that you used a smartphone for relevant tasks for, "...payments, where I have to expose my credit card, Paypal, or bank account...", yet the reply to my question about the security of a smartphone was, "It's not secure, ..." which begs the rhetorical question, why are you using a smartphone? The answer of course is that it's secure enough, most of the time. The wider issue is that the definition of "enough" is being diluted more and more as time goes by. Another good vid by Bryan:
Note I'm pointing out the contradiction above not to be picky at you (I use a smartphone for ebay and email, Windows PC for most things), rather to demonstrate that we all compromise on what the ideal would be for safe and secure coms. I would rather use an SGI for online banking, as I once did, but now my bank blocks browsers it deems too old, forcing one to use something on WIndows, and its use of js had made using an SGI nigh on impossible anyway (ditto many other sites). For most people it's difficut to have much choice in the matter. Most don't realise how bad it can get until something serious happens, something which permits the state or corporations to meddle with peoples lives' in some manner, such as severe censorship or media lying (Trump's election was a non-stop, 2-year example of that, and it's still going on), or simply slicing off the savings of vast numbers of citizens without those affected having any means of preventing it, eg. Cyprus and Greece (those on the left can use whatever verbal spaghetti they want to frame such actions, it's still theft).
Here's another vid by Bryan, and alas I think he's probably right, the forces ranged against a free, open and secure net are too great:
The nature of tech and modern media allows us to delude ourselves into believing that what we have at the moment must have some degree of permanence, but the evidence from the past is that such a thing is almost unheard of. The way people use youtube atm is a good example of this. Many people entirely rely on it for a living, for others it's their primary source of visual entertainment (that includes me), but given what the company has been doing in recent years, and what Google is doing, it's entirely possible it won't be around in 10 years' time (or just a shadow of its former glory), and that's a blink of an eye in cultural terms.
We're in an age where everything media related that envelopes a young person as they grow up can be completely gone by the time they reach adulthood, or even their teens. I can still dig out the old games from my teenage years (8bit home micros), and most from my adult life aswell (N64, GameCube, PS2, most PC stuff pre-Steam), but that's not the case anymore, children growing up now will have an adult life where they will simply not be able to play the vast majority of the games they enjoyed as a child or teenager, they won't be able to show their own children, etc. There are rare exceptions, such as Project Reality, but already there have been numerous online gaming and other services that have just closed and that's that. I like playing Elite Dangerous (and at the moment, Subnautica even more), but one day, unless the devs add some kind of bolton to make offline operation possible, these games will die, they just won't work anymore. And of course, even now, without a net link, vast amounts of modern media is not accessible, a situation which is spreading all the time as ever more services and content switch to IP based distribution (including phone calls).
These changes place enormous power in the hands of corporations and the state; frankly I don't know why more people don't find the notion of what Zuckerberg is trying to do with FB absolutely terrifying, because it's already dreadful. His very earliest comments on privacy when FB first began make it quite clear he doesn't give a damn about user rights. Meanwhile, govts every day show they place citizen rights at the very bottom of the stack of priorities, eg. the way Count Dankula was treated in the UK, ditto Lauren Southern and Tommy Robinson.
I saw a piece a couple of years ago on Bloomberg where the CEO of a big US corp was talking about some of these issues. He mentioned that recently in response to his 15yr old daughter referencing something, he replied well of course she's going to upload that to Facebook for her friends; her response was, "Facebook? Who uses that anymore??" Gopher, archie, Geocities, USENET, Yahoo, AOL, Compuserve, MySpace, and quite likely Twitter not too far in the future, perhaps FB too eventually, they come and they go. Sometimes though, these entities have the potential to cause extraordinary mayhem in the process, and while they're active they can be powerful tools for propaganda and manipulation.
What's really awful though is the staggering amount of cultural content that gets completely wiped out when these entities die (the web archive sites can help to an extent, but it's really only skimming the surface). Consider for a moment the billions of comments typed into YT; a lot of dross for sure, but also a heck of a lot of fascinating, educational and entertaining discussions on an uncountable range of topics, yet YT already indulges in simply obliterating this information whenever it likes, removing videos, deleting channels, censoring/blocking search results, etc. It started as a reaction against conservatives during Trump's campaign, but now it's more a reaction to pressures from old media, attacking new media because old media is dying. I use YT because the MSM alternative is much worse, but at least on youtube I can try to make a difference by talking to people.
Btw, anyone noticed how much of the time, Firefox doesn't even shows the http or https at the top in the URL? It's as if they just don't want one to even think about it... and given what Mozilla has been up to, I don't trust all these little onscreen icons which are supposed to denote a connection is secure or whatever; it's just an image, nothing to stop them putting it there when actually the link isn't secure at all (no different to their interfering with content via injected js/CSS that one hasn't authorised).
I'm working on a charitable PC build
for the Learn Engineering YouTube channel. Please PM/email/call if you'd like to contribute!
Donations of any kind of item I can sell to provide funds are also most firstname.lastname@example.org
+44 (0)7434 635 121