this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2023
689 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

59600 readers
3439 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 content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  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, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If it included identifiable information then yeah it would be a breach. This is just using a mac address most likely that will also if they do it right will be hashed client side so even if a bad actor could do something with that info they won't actually get it anything from it anyway.

[–] RedditWanderer@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Then we just fall back to the issue of them not being able to identify installs, reinstalls, bad actors spoofing the source etc..

If they could track installs properly they would have solved piracy already

[–] MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

Well they've mainly said (recently) that they'll count new device installs, but not reinstallations on the same device. Which i believe. It's the whole, exemptions of charity sales and pirate copies is where they're spouting bullshit, or is PR/ higher ups making quick premises to placate without the engineers saying that that's possible, but now they've got to find a way. Which I don't think they will without heavily bloating the runtime into super shitty DRM realms