this post was submitted on 17 Jun 2025
690 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

71585 readers
3581 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 1 day ago (2 children)

SO CAN WE NOW ADMIT SELLING DATA IS BAD?

[–] dil@lemmy.zip 2 points 21 hours ago

theyll only stop selling politicians and block that

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 2 points 23 hours ago

We need to wait until a republican gets killed.

remember that exactly a month ago trump killed the cfpb rule targetting data brokers.

[–] Cocopanda@lemmy.world 26 points 1 day ago (6 children)

My parents started screaming at me when I brought up a preacher killed these democrats. Telling me he was a Liberal. When I showed them his sermons in Africa. Again they double downed and said he was a democrat.

How would you respond to this ignorance? What facts can I show them. If they won’t even believe his own words at a church in Africa?

[–] Excrubulent@slrpnk.net 12 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

They are obviously not in a reasoning place. I wouldn't try logic, but they are susceptible to emotional manipulation. That's how they fell for fascist propaganda in the first place. I would go for emotional truth.

You have to judge if you're safe to do this, but the next time they're screaming about their absurd conspiracies, I would get a really sad look on my face, make direct eye contact, shake my head and say, "You're so full of hate, and it's really sad." Just go full sincerity and show them how you see them.

You can even set them up for it. Next time you try telling them some fact that they're going to have this hateful response to, you can have this in your back pocket. You start with a simple fact, they respond with hate, you reply by telling them they're being hateful.

This is a modification of this strategy: https://youtu.be/tZzwO2B9b64

Basically, don't waste time arguing with fascists, just point out that they're being assholes.

Now, I say you need to judge how safe you feel doing this, because you might be surprised how ballistic they go. People stuck in abusive behaviour patterns hate nothing more than having that behaviour simply described to them. But when they do lose their shit, you can just describe it again.

Sometimes they will just short-circuit and try to ignore you, or chastise you for speaking out of turn. The authoritarian personality is deeply connected to authoritarian parenting attitudes. Just persist over time, and maybe they will notice that they can't stop you from reflecting their ugly selves back at them.

I don't know how old you are, how physically big you are, how prone they are to serious outbursts, but again, pay attention to your body and how much you're feeling your flight instinct. Only if you feel safe.

I do this with my parents sometimes. Like if my mum is fussing over my kids in some way that I think is invasive, - this was a sore point in my upbringing, she has no filter and no boundaries - I don't engage on the facts of what she's saying. I don't tell her, "That tiny red spot you've noticed isn't a big problem," because that's also being invasive and speaking on their behalf. I say "People don't like to be scrutinised like that. If that's a real problem they can tell us."

It's honestly astonishing how fast this resolves some situations. That might have been a perennial argument about some fussy detail of my child's appearance, all the time adding to the boundary-crossing scrutiny they experience, but shutting it down by pointing out her behaviour really makes her stop, and it communicates to my kids that they don't have to put up with it. It teaches them that they have autonomy.

It's taken many years of demonstrating to her that I won't be pushed around or intimidated for me to get to this point though. It's not an easy road, and often the way to know the tactic is working is by watching how unpleasant someone gets when you do it, at least at first.

Again: only if you feel safe.

[–] Enceladus@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Lock Fox news channels with parental control.

[–] Cocopanda@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Sadly they don’t watch the news on TV. They went Qanon from social media and I can’t get to their phones.

[–] Zenith@lemm.ee 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

That depends entirely on how sneaky and unscrupulous you’re willing to be lol

Seriously though I’m sorry you’re dealing with this, it’s a shitty place to be. Personally I’ve had friends have some success with anti-cult/anti-brainsashing techniques but even when done under ideal conditions with people in obvious and outright cults it can fail. The human brain really just is wired in such a way cult think can genuinely hijack it

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] socsa@piefed.social 9 points 1 day ago

Stop talking to them

How would you respond to this ignorance?

Humans are mortal, you wait for the reaper to take them, then piss on their grave.

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 1 points 23 hours ago

Hire some thugs to beat it into them. Show them the evidence, every time they reject it, get them beaten a bit more. /j

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] twice_hatch@midwest.social 56 points 1 day ago (4 children)
[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 30 points 1 day ago

That'll be on the Internet's headstone.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] anachrohack@lemmy.world 56 points 1 day ago (3 children)

These sites should be illegal. There is no legitimate use for them

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 55 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Why aren't the data brokers being charged with accessory to murder?

[–] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 105 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (5 children)

There is no allegedly, the dude was a total boomer and literally wrote out instructions on how to dox someone in his notebook which are shown in the federal complaint against him

Literally outlines which sites are free, which ones have free trials, etc

Like you you would think he would just use a text document or bookmarks or something

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 25 points 1 day ago

Writing stuff down with pen and paper is an objectively better way to remember things then digital files, also way more secure unless you really, really know what you're doing.

[–] MNByChoice@midwest.social 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I guess this is a good way to spread the techniques to others....

[–] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 23 hours ago

I mean this is shockingly easy to find. Literally his last point is “type name in ‘john doe’ in google search engine” and unless the person has a very common name or a strong online presence that alone will pull up tons of these sites

These sites are pretty gross and should probably have some kind of regulation. They ultimately are just compiling public records but they make things shockingly easy and are ultimately used for domestic abuse, stalking, and shit like swatting and doxxing more than any legitimate purpose. As others have said, maybe the fact that this has led to politicians being targeted will mean that regulation finally occurs but given the current climate and the fact that the targeted politicians were on the wrong team maybe not

[–] Zenith@lemm.ee 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Idk if I’m planning on murdering someone I’m not keeping it in digital form where who knows who or what is stealing/scraping it or using a back door or whatever. Deleting stuff off a computer can also be difficult with insane things being recovered off computers. I would have zero interest in linking anything illegal to anything digital in this day and age.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Technus@lemmy.zip 154 points 2 days ago (8 children)

The suspect faces several charges of second-degree murder.

This baffles me. Looking up your fucking victim's addresses isn't enough evidence of premeditation to qualify for first-degree charges?

[–] three@lemmy.zip 154 points 2 days ago (1 children)

In Minnesota, a grand jury is required for first degree. This is just a placeholder charge until they can get a jury.

[–] Technus@lemmy.zip 23 points 2 days ago

That's what I figured after thinking about it, that there had to be some procedural reason for it.

[–] centof@lemm.ee 42 points 2 days ago (5 children)

If he was left-wing, this would be prosecuted (and propagandized by the media) as terrorism.

[–] Ledericas@lemm.ee 23 points 2 days ago

he wouldve been charged already, much like with mr luigi was. since he targeted the protected ":class"

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Mirshe@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

Arguably, the list alone, plus the customized police vehicle and police outfit, would be enough premeditation.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 108 points 2 days ago (4 children)

The last major American privacy law, the 1988 Video Privacy Protection Act was passed in 1988 by Reagan. The only reason it happened is that politicians realized that their privacy was affected. Robert Bork was going through his Supreme Court confirmation hearings and someone got a hold of the tapes he had rented and published them.

Politicians were worried about their own personal privacy, so they passed a new law to protect the privacy of people's video tape rentals.

Maybe the fact that the targets here were politicians will mean that something will happen with data privacy, for once.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] mmmac@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I've been using a service to automatically opt out of these sites for about a year now. I also don't use my full last name when I buy things online anymore, and use VOIP phone numbers and anonaddy/simplelogub emails.

Can't find myself on google and most data brokers anymore.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)
[–] mmmac@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I've used both Mozilla monitor and optery. Both are a bit slow on the removals, but they get the job done. I've used optery for the past year. Unsure if there's a better one at this point or not.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 28 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

It's actually really easy to get your info off these sites, as they have to delete it upon your request. Just take 20 minutes, pull up any random Top 20 Background Check Sites list, locate the specific pages with your info, and go to town with those deletion requests. (There should be a link to a deletion form on the page or a link to submit a request via email, at least that's how it was when I did this five years ago.)

[–] Mk23simp@lemmy.blahaj.zone 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I'm not a lawyer, but from my understanding there's actually no legal obligation for them to delete US citizens' data. They generally delete it anyways to avoid creating backlash that would lead to regulation, though.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Erasmus@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I read your post and reply below and am surprised that your info never showed back up online.

I tried this myself about a year ago back when Google first announced they would also add a tool to assist in removal of unnecessary info like this.

I found that I was able to remove about 70% that never came back.

10-15 percent more, whether they were via Google or whatever, would flat out refuse to remove the info for various reasons.

The remainder would often remove it only for me to find it later with some sort of ‘change’ and that being - they put the info back in and had changed the spelling of my last name or now had me listed as a business so as to get around certain privacy listing rules (like WTF).

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 1 day ago

There was some story about privacy and politicians finally getting off their asses when they learned that their business records at porn shops could be revealed. I think this was in the 80s. Not sure at what level, but probably pretty local, I would guess.

[–] solrize@lemmy.world 30 points 2 days ago (2 children)

If they own houses that is public info.

[–] tyler@programming.dev 37 points 2 days ago (5 children)

While true, the lookup is the address to the owner, not the other way around. Compiling the information to show querying by person should be illegal.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Hello_there@fedia.io 24 points 2 days ago (4 children)

You can find out someone's home address from their email address. These brokers are out of control.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›