As someone without much knowledge of implementing decentralized communication, am I missing some knowledge, or is it solely lack of interest?
These are genuine questions because I don't understand everything either
Also, you could define a maximum file limit size, and at that point your phone would be considered backed up, and then if no other route is found, the transfer is cancelled after a certain timeout.
That is only a software bug.
Heartbeat pings to contact list, cached at senders end until recipient is ready and offer aliased nodes as a feature so multiple devices can act as a RAID array for an identity, both at senders end and recipients.
The video will be on the sender's device until the recipient confirms that they have received a 100%. So this prevents a phone storage clogging situation.
> The infrastructure forces my phone to instantly download the content, because no one is paying for storage of it before it gets routed to me right?
Yeah, that would be accurate. There could be intermediaries that charge low prices to cache snaps for you so you didn't have to download it ASAP, but that would negate the ephemeral nature built into Snapchat)
Of course, this is more viable if this gains a large network.
> but it could be solved with a DHT
I think that tox is the solution to what you are asking for.
I think there's a big misconception about privacy rights in America. I think a lot of people believe the government is actually allowed to collect otherwise private information, and that it's important they do so. I think this causes people to become complicit in giving away their information because they don't feel they have any choice, which allows people to become willfully ignorant, which makes it easy for the private sector to do the same.
Tldr, the government is setting a precedent where we shouldn't care about our privacy.
Here's what you aren’t seeing, if I may: Consumers see the end product. They intuit rules based on what they see. I only see pictures and videos sent to me, and then they are gone. From this their mental model becomes No one can see media that is not sent to them, and the media is gone after it has been seen. This is strikingly different from the way a developer at Snapchat models the world: We run a big warehouse full of data and media. We present this media to users based on logic that prevents arbitrary non-admin users from seeing others' content and from experiencing that content repeatedly. Oh, and we should eventually get around to writing that cronjob to delete old media. And once we rule the world, we can spend time playing with end-to-end encryption, maybe.
People aren’t stupid (mostly). They are just ignorant (in the literal sense). They are extrapolating in a way that makes sense in a physical world but not in the digital world.
The clearest analogy is that of actual dice vs. video gambling or the virtual spinner in a free-to-play game. With actual dice, what you see is what you get: fair odds. But that virtual wheel is 'weighted' to end on the worthless prize right after the jackpot space nearly every time.
I don’t understand the article it quotes unnamed “former” employees who might very well could have been the ones who got fired for improper access.
I would estimate 100 million pictures of underage genitals go in or out of Snapchats account on Google servers every day.
Google nearly kicked them off the platform for it, but money spoke too loudly...
(Edit: seems I'm a victim of Poe's Law. Oh well. In case anyone is sincerely wondering, I've left the below. Not sure I agree w/ such unmarked sarcasm though; I think there are a good number of people in SV trying to act ethically w/ consumer data.)
You're kidding me, right? I have nearly an opposite impression of Uber as a company:
Uber's self-driving car killed a woman while the human was not paying attention at the wheel; IDK what the end result of this was, but at the time it was scandalous for a. the driver not paying attention and b. the car not noticing the human basically at all, until it was basically about to make impact. (Whatever sensors/sensor processing was happening failed entirely. IIRC, the Lidar company basically stated their stuff would have seen the human, and it was Uber's software that ignored that signal. The NTSB investigated it, but IDK what the resolution was.)
There was a long history of sexual workplace harassment scandals ("In August 2018, Uber agreed to pay a total of $7 million to 480 workers to settle claims of gender discrimination, harassment and hostile work environment."; the former CEO resigned over similar allegations).
There's been numerous reports of them skirting or flat out ignoring the law in many jurisdictions.
The incident where a driver refused to service someone with a service animal.
Allegations over their treatment of drivers (that they're mislead in how much they can earn; that they're banned for even the slightest of transgressions; their classification as contractors and not employees, but they're not allowed to set their own rates by logging when the price isn't worth their while).
The Greyball thing:
> Uber developed an internal software tool called Greyball, which uses data collected from the Uber mobile app other means, to avoid giving rides to certain individuals. The tool was used starting in 2014. By showing "ghost cars" driven by fake drivers to the targeted individuals in the Uber mobile app, and by giving real drivers a means to cancel rides requested by those individuals, Uber was able to avoid giving rides to known law enforcement officers in areas where its service is illegal.
: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/05/20/lyft_uber_surge_pri... (not sure if this is the best source)
Also, the CEO of Reddit was caught editing user comments. https://www.reddit.com/r/announcements/comments/5frg1n/tifu_...
Stuff like this is pretty much guaranteed to happen in places that sit on a lot of data. The only question is whether it get noticed and then published.
But Snapchat has been around a while and clearly does have some internal controls over this. Not good enough, apparently.