Gregory's Server
@m0xee @Suiseiseki @iska
>So both are important.
I agree. But you have to be pragmatic about it, one side you are sure that you are protected the other side is just a promise.
>that not using proprietary solutions on its own is ineffective
I disagree.
>You've got to have some alternative that's actually usable
And we have them.
>Apple and MS at least sell tech
They don't sell anything, when you read their EULA you will learn that they give you a temporary revocable authorization of usage of their Services as a software.
>to some extent. Facebook doesn't sell any tech
They provide a service free of charge in exchange of your private data.
>it's a surveillance company.
Same as Microsoft and Apple, like all proprietary software entities.
>So both are important.
I agree. But you have to be pragmatic about it, one side you are sure that you are protected the other side is just a promise.
>that not using proprietary solutions on its own is ineffective
I disagree.
>You've got to have some alternative that's actually usable
And we have them.
>Apple and MS at least sell tech
They don't sell anything, when you read their EULA you will learn that they give you a temporary revocable authorization of usage of their Services as a software.
>to some extent. Facebook doesn't sell any tech
They provide a service free of charge in exchange of your private data.
>it's a surveillance company.
Same as Microsoft and Apple, like all proprietary software entities.
@mangeurdenuage @Suiseiseki @iska
> they give you a temporary revocable authorization of usage of their Services
Oh, I think they are different because they sell hardware 😂
Apple does, so does MS: Xbox and Surface things. For Google this part of their bussiness is near negligent, but they still have it. There were some talks of "Facebook-phone", but I believe it didn't come to fruition — so pure surveillance there.