We are talking about a specific person that you quoted how I described them as if I might be making shit up.
No, thats just you beeing offended. Never once did that.
I never once said this applies to every person.
But with the quote at the start you implied that there a lots of ppl. It should be common sense that there is almost never a 100% complete agreement within such a broad undefined group.
I never said that you are wrong. You have misinterpreted that. I simply say that in general, that what you said about your relative is not enough to assume that the relative does not care about privacy.
I never have said anything else. More information was not given.
I am mostly referring to the first 2 sentences since the other text does not comment on anything that he actually said or did.
Just because someone is naive enough to think that a smart device does not spy on you or downplays what they know does not mean they do not care about privacy.
In order to say that the relative does not care about privacy, the relative would have to know the exact extent on what they collect and what they can do with it. You cannot assume that a normal person or even "tech savvy person" understands what is possible.
It is possible that what you said is applicable for your relative but in general this does not apply.
Just because your "tech savvy relativ" says you should not overthink does not mean the relativ does not care about it.
It just means your relativ does not assume that its privacy gets invaded by every device.
This are 2 different things.
Yep, there even was a standard that would have been sufficient, Do Not Track. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_Not_Track
A port is not secure or insecure. The thing that can lead to security risks is the service that answers that port.
Use strong authentication and encryption on those services and keep them up to date.
I hate when i have to go 4 links deep to get an explanation of what it even is.
Let's not forget this here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRdL0StldJM
Wired headphones do not have the need for replaceable batteries.
If the CPU died, the PC would not have booted up so far.
A lot of IDEs would probably throw a warning about unreachable code.
No you are mistaken with "Or $5 mire to own it". You own a license to watch for the amount of time the platforms decides to keep it up.
Yes and i never said anything different. But your anecdotes does not provide that generalization.