Nytimes has nowhere near the influence facebook does, and it’s way less unhealthy of a behavior as one of myriad similar sources. They average out to being harder to manipulate than facebook is.
I mean, software companies will spin ads any way they can to get engineers interested. That’s their prerogative. It doesn’t mean any of it is true—the world is 100% worse off due to ads, and no amount of smooth scrolling animations is going to change that.
The nature of the relationship is unknown. Even if Kaspersky is bought by Putin in some way, it’s not clear what the terms and expectations are. It does seem unlikely that the commercial offering is straight up spyware for putin—why would anyone buy it? So it’s a little silly to talk about the relationship as if its existence is meaningful when the degree of ownership is the real question.
This is true. But i’m ok with stupidity hurting individuals—at least in terms of compromise—i’m less ok with default settings being potentially insecure one day.
I mean, I’d rather just not have internet connected devices at all. But the internet is a commons, and people who don’t patch ruin it for everyone.
But, there’s a difference between auto update by default and forced updates. And there’s, again, the option of buying the same thing with no internet connection—pretty much nothing you own needs to be connected to the internet at all.
Do for their own good? I see this as for the collective good, as most of the people hurt by unpatched software are NOT microsoft but people, small businesses, and the victims of the resulting botnets.
Obviously if you know what this is you can turn it off.