Are there any legal security issues to be concerned about as a developer of this kind of anonymous service?
I wonder every time I see a project like this, namely anonymous or transient hosting of any kind of user data, whether the developers get any kind of flak from agencies claiming it could be used to nefarious ends.
Serving plain text is obviously less of a concern
than hosting images, video, etc.
But I imagine the more anonymous a service is, the more attractive it is for use by unsavory actors.
This strikes me as entirely being exactly the things of which you are accuse the parent post's author.
> "people like you are part of the problem"
> "such judgemental bullshit"
> "judgmental jerks who prolong the schism between people"
Whatever your positions or beliefs on the matter, or opinions of the post author to whom you are responding, your opinions and views could be more effectively expressed
using logic and reasoning without the ad hominem and vulgarity.
In any regard: it's beneath the community standards of reasoned and respectful communication on HN, which I think many of us highly appreciate and value.
It looks like Google 2FA will support using a Yubikey or something like it, which in my mind is preferable to being required to use the Google mobile app.
> You'll enter your password [...] Then, a code will be sent to your phone via text, voice call, or our mobile app. Or, if you have a Security Key, you can insert it into your computer’s USB port.
But, in trying to imagine any scenario in which tech corporations might conceivably start hosting their internal user data on these external "Solid Pods", I'm left drawing a blank.
Until we have a way that tech companies start storing users' data in user-controlled infrastructure, I think this idea is a noble fantasy.
I would love to hear an argument that will convince me I'm wrong on this.
I suspect he/she means we have the ability to vote in our political system, which _does_ have the ability to influence what corporations are/aren't allowed to do.
I know a lot of the people who are overwhelmed by debt don't have the spare mental or emotional space to deal with something else equally overwhelming, which is visualizing their path out of it.
The "great migration" of post-slavery African Americans from around 1916-1970.
Millions left the South under threat of death and worse to escape continuing slavery-like conditions and oppression of the Jim Crow era, radically altering the political, economic, and demographic balance of the nation.
Totally mind blowing, and never got a whiff of mention in my history books growing up beyond "Jim Crow laws were a thing. Then WWII happened"
Surely state laws and thus lawsuits based on them can only be applied to entities operating within those states.
Right?