• 0 Posts
  • 27 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 26th, 2023

help-circle
  • The Microsoft account holds a backup of the recovery key, which you need to use to restore access in if you do something like significantly change the hardware or move the drive to a different system (which are effectively the same thing).

    You don’t need it for day-to-day use of the system, and you can also just get the recovery key and print it out or write it down somewhere, which is usually how it’s handled on systems that don’t use a Microsoft account.

    Not as disastrous as I assumed then, thanks!




  • Some of the things mentioned in the OP don’t actually happen in real life, though. Bitlocker is only automatically activated if you use a Microsoft account to log in, and why wouldn’t you know the account credentials if it’s what you use to log in?

    Maybe I’m misunderstanding something here, but does this whole thing not mean that the moment you use your Microsoft account for logging in, you immediately tie the permanent accessibility of your local files to you retaining access to a cloud account?

    TPM is optional (but recommended) for Bitlocker. Practically every computer released in the past 10 years has TPM support. Secure boot is needed to ensure that the boot is secure and thus it’s okay to load the encryption key. Without it, a rootkit could be injected that steals the encryption key. You generally want to use TPM and secure boot on Linux too, not just on Windows. You need secure boot to prevent an “evil maid attack”

    You have different opinions on TPM and the prevalence of evil maids than me, fair. But please don’t disregard the central premise of my last comment: One is already using a different encryption solution. Say, Veracrypt is churning away in the background. Why would one leave Bitlocker activated?



  • I know, I just meant why would someone willingly disable Bitlocker?

    I mean… the premise of the thread seems like a good enough reason, doesn’t it?
    And even if it doesn’t, if one is already using a different encryption solution that doesn’t rely on TPM and secureboot silliness, what possible reason could there be not to disable Bitlocker?



  • Why do people host LLMs at home when processing the same amount of data from the internet to train their LLM will never be even a little bit as efficient as sending a paid prompt to some high quality official model?
    inb4 privacy concerns or a proof of concept this is out of discussion, I want someone to prove his LLM can be as insightful and accurate as paid one. I don’t care about anything else than quality of generated answers

    If you ask other people for their reasoning and opinions, it doesn’t really make any sense to put something “out of the discussion”, does it? :P

    But no, if you have no qualms about sharing your innermost feelings, sexual preference or illegal plans with those that have an explicit desire to exploit that information then there is little reason to attempt something as complicated and wasteful as self-hosting your own LLMs.




  • I often reply under Japanese posts, and I always assume users will use a translator as I do, but maybe in the context of a Japanese this may look rude?

    Can’t speak for others (obviously, as this is about individual etiquette perceptions) but I would consider it to be polite to only enter conversations with unknown parties in languages that the parties have shown to be capable of speaking and understanding.
    Using a new language entering a conversation would therefore signal either familiarity (“I know they understand me”) or rudeness (“I don’t care if they understand me”) to me, I suppose.


  • While I have to apologize for not being able to provide you with any help for the problem at hand I just wanted to note that if you open up identical public threads via a reddit account and via a lemmy account at the same time then those two accounts are then, for data analysis purposes, connected for all eternity. You might as well not bother using different nicknames.
    If that isn’t a concern to you then just ignore my ramblings.






  • splendoruranium@infosec.pubtoPrivacy@lemmy.mlIt hurts all over
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Privacy sentiments are subjective beliefs, not an objective fact like nature.

    I genuinely don’t see a point in engaging with you, even just based on what I stated above where you use your personal beliefs in line with objective, provable elements of the natural world. So I’ll choose not to. Cheers. 👍

    While I obviously cannot force you to continue a conversation you do not wish to have, I’m a bit perplexed by what you’re saying here and at what point “belief” entered the conversation. If you’re saying that data, personal and otherwise, has no real, objective, provable value then surely that would go against all physical evidence? There must be some kind of misunderstanding here. Well, cheers ✋


  • splendoruranium@infosec.pubtoPrivacy@lemmy.mlIt hurts all over
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    I wouldn’t mind you finding out any information about me. I would mind you feeling entitled to me putting in effort and time to answer you. I’ve read all the suggestions people here posted and none made me reflect or get anywhere near changing my mind. Privacy centric people just have to accept not everyone is like them. I respect your need for privacy. I don’t understand why you obsessively require me to hold the same belief.

    I don’t think anyone requires you to hold any specific beliefs, nobody within this comment chain anyway.

    It’s a bit akin to meeting someone on the street and being told “It’s nighttime!” while the sun is out. I’d definitely be interested in understanding why that other person considers it to be nighttime and I would at the very least be disappointed not to get a conversation out of it.

    Three different fictitious requests:

    1. “Can you spare some change?”
    2. “Would you let me skip ahead of the queue please? I have an urgent appointment later on.”
    3. “Will you let us share your user data with our partners in order to improve our services?”

    I’m assuming here - and please correct me if I am wrong - that you would be likely to acquiesce to 3. in most contexts, maybe even more likely than to acquiesce to 1. or 2.?


  • You unfortunately can’t teach something like this to someone who doesn’t even understand the consequences of it. Or care.

    You can absolutely explain it and teach it and make people care. It’s just not easy. I’ve only ever encountered uninformed “I have nothing to hide”-responses to equally lackluster throwaway explanations . It’s a very difficult and abstract topic, it doesn’t come naturally! Don’t treat privacy concerns as equivalent to pointing out dirt on someone’s clothes, treat it like calculus. Successfully conveying it requires time, conversation and didactics.