Recall sits in a secure vault behind BitLocker encryption secured with Windows Hello.

BitLocker+Windows Hello gets broken through, the world has a much larger problem than some screenshots, because that's the foundation of, like, 80% of enterprise security.

If you're afraid that an attacker sits on your PC and just waits for you to unlock the vault, then you already have the PC breached to the point where they don't have to do that, they already have access to everything else.

If you're afraid of the feature in anyway, don't use it.

So you're saying you haven't bothered to read about Recall at all, you just assumed it's going to be enabled by default?

If it does that, outrage will be understandable.

Getting outraged about something they said will be 100% optional and hasn't even released yet is just childish.

And how do you know it’s not malicious in nature?

Because I have a functioning brain.

I’d like to know what your definition of “malicious” is

Malware is designed to hurt you by extracting your personal information or resources.

Telemetry is designed to give developers feedback about product/functionality usage and is anonymous.

you’re just fine with letting a Corpo run system look at everything you’re doing.

I'm not, and it's not. Unlike you, I actually checked what data telemetry gathers and I'm perfectly fine with it. It's inconsequential and anonymous.

However regarding Windows telemetry it’s indistinguishable from spyware - you have no idea nor control over the data gathered, measured and processed

Ah, so you're another one of those fear-mongers?

Here's the Required Diagnostic Events Fields (required telemetry) documentation.

Keeping in mind that it's anonymous - which parts of this are you so vehemently against sending to Microsoft?

That makes Windows telemetry fulfill all spyware criteria.

The shittiest spyware in history, I guess, considering it's all anonymous...

That is your data they are taking to make money off of without your consent

I mean... They're a for-profit company, so literally anything they do is to make money.

But it's not "my data", it's anonymous. The "engagement" info is in relation to features. That's why some features are removed - because nobody uses them. Or rather: not enough people use them to warrant maintenance.

What are you talking about now?

Right. So you're all panicking just in case.

That's what's being swept under the rug as "alarmists being loud".

Good morning!

How's my favorite genocide denialist scumbag today?

Still alive? Surprising

lmao you believe that? What a simp

You trust microsoft implicitly no matter what they do, I get it.

Now whilst I enjoy all the comments I actually have to add something quickly that explains why this kind of thing happens. I recently worked with a rather old lady to find out why she was having so many issues with technology and stuff. I found out that when she started work in 1986 she was told that the shared password in her department at the local hospital was "password" and so she has used that on everything she can since to remember it... other gems that they used on whole departments included "qwerty" and "123456" and the best one of all "letmeinnow". On whole shared networks of 100+ machines...

BUT... most people really don't care about that, they just want to remove ads from facebook or youtube or whatever...
My clients couldn't care less about what the CEO does, heck they still think facebook is the dogs danglies and youtube is cutting edge plus Netflix is the best streaming service.
Fighting that is way harder than then trying to explain that some software is worse than others. Heck plenty still use Photoshop because they don't understand that alternatives exist and "everyone at work uses it"

I don't. I read tech specs and security analyses. You just stick your head in the sand whenever someone says "Microsoft", though. It's silly.

I've been dosing too much tux, doc. My mind's all FOSSY.

If you only use software that is created by people you like... well... i guess your only choice will be an abacus...

I just think the idea of your alternative being partially coded by the company you're attempting to avoid is a little stupid. I don't give a shit who he is. I barely give a shit who runs Mozilla.

Brave and every other Chromium fork are at the mercy of Google to exist as an alternative to Google, which to me, defeats the point. Every bit of their effort would be better spent rolling their money over to donate to browser development rather than band-aids.

I don't care if I like them. I very much care if I'm making money for people who are actively trying to take away my rights

To me the karma system is about quality. Not an “I agree/disagree” button.

That's how it was meant to be. The original Rediquette from over 15 years ago has:

"Vote. If you think something contributes to conversation, upvote it. If you think it does not contribute to the subreddit it is posted in or is off-topic in a particular community, downvote it.
[Please don't] Downvote an otherwise acceptable post because you don't personally like it. Think before you downvote and take a moment to ensure you're downvoting someone because they are not contributing to the community dialogue or discussion. If you simply take a moment to stop, think and examine your reasons for downvoting, rather than doing so out of an emotional reaction, you will ensure that your downvotes are given for good reasons."

But 99% of people definitely use them as an Agree/Disagree button.

I don't trust them and they have given me sufficient reason over the course of decades not to.