• 3 Posts
  • 22 Comments
Joined 7 个月前
cake
Cake day: 2024年12月21日

help-circle

  • Your fingerprint, voice, face, IMEI, IP address, VPN provider, geolocation, wireless service, cell signal, Bluetooth band, battery usage, browsing history, email address, email domain, access patterns, naming habits, interests, verbiage patterns, are all things that can be used to identify you. Even if you’ve limited use of those things and more, you just listed 3 other companies who all are collecting data on you and sharing it in realtime to the company who’s site you’re trying to access.

    My advice to you is to either comply and ask them how to lift the ban or get away from the site and stop selling your identity for free. Then do some HARD copy book reading on privacy. I could recommend a few but I don’t want to be confused for the propaganda posts that flood this community.


  • This is not a verification request. If you look at the screenshot, they are explicitly asking to have access to the intimate data that my cellular carrier is willing to transfer to them, given my perpetual release of it. Probably because of an existing bargain between the two parties on how much each will bid if one takes on the other’s liability (phone company advertises they won’t release all your data forever > but phone company promotes credit company > credit company boldly requests usage data > credit company pays phone company and both win).

    These are corporations who make their money by selling peoples’ data. Offering a free copy of the report is and always was just a pacifier for the privacy advocates who wanted legislation. They don’t actually have any interest in providing credit reports to the “consumer” securely or within the legally required timeframe. Their interest is in obtaining more data and in the security/validity of their own harvested datum, which are assets to them.










  • Yep. Just like for-profit companies, having a diverse range of revenue streams is necessary for securing the financial health of the organization. While Wikipedia receives significant donations from companies like Google and Microsoft, it is essential to also solicit contributions from individuals to ensure that their income is not overly reliant on a single source. Just like in for-profits, Wikimedia likely determines the percentages of income from various sources needed to maintain this diversity. This concept seems particularly important for Wikipedia given its mission to provide unbiased information.

    On another note, I’ve seen your same “100 years” notion mentioned a few times on this post. I can’t imagine that everyone who’s saying it independently had the idea to analyze their financial statements and calculate projections over 100 years. Is this an article you’re quoting? Just curious.




  • If you’re asking that question because you’re genuinely conflicted about donating and you’re not just here spreading divisive nonsense on behalf of Elon Musk, you could do a deeper delve into the entire foundation or look up the Wikipedia page on Income Statements.

    You seem to be hung up on the operating expenses. That’s just a finance term for certain operational costs like the electricity bill and insurance. It does not mean the total of what it costs to run the organization and that everything else is in excess. Similarly, salary expenses includes everyone from the HR department to the custodians, not just the rich CEOs.



  • The politically elite are so used to puppeteering public sentiment with ease, and so confident in their efforts to suppress education in America that they have stopped trying to be sneaky. All American ‘news’ is propaganda and the this is a blatant attempt to divide the public on one of the last free resources for factual information**. Free as in non-criminalized. These types of posts by EM are to incite division in order to amp-up for the criminalization of information. And it’s not very difficult to see.

    **factual when readers uphold its integrity through critical consumption and editing.


  • Love that everyone on this thread is a financial analyst and a 501c consultant.

    For-profit companies have the margins they do because they’ve successfully detached humanity from their spending obligations. Wikipedia does not need to do quarterly global lay-offs or labor off-shoring when their technology doesn’t meet release deadlines. They are a nonprofit. They exist to bring factual, accessible information to the world. If you support for this cause, donate. If you don’t, don’t donate or don’t use. If you care for the cause but want the CEO to take a paycut, well, find them one who will stick around for more than a few years on less than the average mega CEO salary. Because most of them have not.