XScreensaver's Hilarious Google Privacy Policy
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 июн 2024
- If Xscreensaver wants to be on the Android Play Store it needed a privacy policy, now the developer didn't care at all about having to include so what go included as a result was basically just a giant troll
==========Support The Channel==========
► Patreon: brodierobertson.xyz/patreon
► Paypal: brodierobertson.xyz/paypal
► Liberapay: brodierobertson.xyz/liberapay
► Amazon USA: brodierobertson.xyz/amazonusa
==========Resources==========
Request Ideas: www.jwz.org/blog/2024/06/your...
Xscreensaver Policy: mastodon.social/@jwz/11259033...
=========Video Platforms==========
🎥 Odysee: brodierobertson.xyz/odysee
🎥 Podcast: techovertea.xyz/youtube
🎮 Gaming: brodierobertson.xyz/gaming
==========Social Media==========
🎤 Discord: brodierobertson.xyz/discord
🐦 Twitter: brodierobertson.xyz/twitter
🌐 Mastodon: brodierobertson.xyz/mastodon
🖥️ GitHub: brodierobertson.xyz/github
==========Credits==========
🎨 Channel Art:
Profile Picture:
/ supercozman_draws
#Linux #Xscreensaver #FOSS #OpenSource #LinuxDesktop #Android
🎵 Ending music
Track: Debris & Jonth - Game Time [NCS Release]
Music provided by NoCopyrightSounds.
Watch: • Debris & Jonth - Game ...
Free Download / Stream: ncs.io/GameTime
DISCLOSURE: Wherever possible I use referral links, which means if you click one of the links in this video or description and make a purchase I may receive a small commission or other compensation. 
Наука
![mgk - Sun to Me (Zach Bryan Cover) [Live from Cheshire Cottage]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/_ZnbTEs4O6U/mqdefault.jpg)
Now we need a fork of XScreensaver that does all these things so users can make a choice themselves
Found the Gentoo user.
@@immoloismsays you !!! silly
I have the specific requirement for a fork of XScreensaver that will run around and desert me.
@@flubba86 how would that even work? It would just stop working randomly lmao?
@@xXRealXx must be the windows version...
Google once sent me an email threatening to remove my app from the Play Store if I didn't provide a way to delete user data.
My app doesn't collect user data. I couldn't even get to the required form on the Play Console because I had already told it I don't collect any data. I kept getting threatening emails because I hadn't completed the form.
Seems like someone at Google couldn't even fathom not collecting anything.
'someone at Google'? You mean the entire company?
It's not that Google can't fathom it, it's that Google can't profit from the data you collect. I think. Does it make sense?
As a fun fact, Google Play's Data Safety page for Xscreensaver (basically a summary of Xscreensaver's data collection policies) warns that the dev didn't provide any info on how to delete collected data...right under the parts where it says the app doesn't collect, use, or share data. Clap and a half.
I've heard that a single clap is a greater degree of shade than no claps, so now i'm wondering how the math works out to show how much shade a clap and a half is.
That's funny, because they do provide a way, it's on their policy:
"Unlike Google, XScreenSaver will honor deletion requests if you email us asking to delete all none of your user data that does not exist."
If you select that your app doesn't collect any data, you can't even reach the form where it asks you about data deletion. It's pretty silly that that section in the Play store isn't just removed for those cases.
Google cares about your privacy if it's not Google violating it.
similar to how Apple cares about your privacy as long as it's not Apple violating it. (yet they market themselves as more private w/ the iPhone or etc.)
Of course does Google care about our privacy.
Or more specifically about our data. Our data is what Google uses to make money. Not by selling the data, but by classifying us into target groups for advertising, and then selling advertisements targeted at a specific group.
They would have a real issue if any of our data is leaked because that's their "gold".
@@Linuxdirkwhich is also the reason why they're so kneen on winning the ad blocker war, yet can't seem to do so.
indeed, google actually keeps you very safe from pretty much everyone who isn't google
Android has a Backdoor twice big than Ms Recall
They forgot to add
Unlike Google, XScreenSaver will never prevent you from running a privacy frontend
Google Graveyard just reminded me how many hours I spent learning technologies that were intentionally obsoleted. I think Google owes me money.
Unlike Google, XScreenSaver will never be evil.
You never know, it's got X in its name, Elon musk may try to take it over
@@AnEagleand elon's far from evil
@@nikoraasu6929please say you're joking
@@nikoraasu6929 children yearn for the lithium mines
@@GoodGirlPeruru rich man bad because rich man more intelligent.
I still can't get over how RUclips removed a video I did of a sunset due to being "sexual content", not just once, not twice, not thrice, but four times (I only bothered to appeal three times). It was literally just a sunset...
Seems like yet another case of badly trained AI being used for automatic content moderation.
Damn, that video sounds interesting. Do you, by chance, still have the video file? I only need it for research purposes of course ;^)
It must've been a REALLY nice sunset.
Devils Advocate: Perhaps they were worried about people being mooned if the video went for long enough.
This reminds me of Thunderfoot's video called "Watching electrons with naked eye", that got demonetized for the same reason.
This is known as "weapons grade shitposting" among professionals.
Unlike Google, XScreenSaver will never try to make WebP a thing got me lmao
lol
I actually think WebP is quite a good format, just that the initial support for it in third-party apps took crazy long to appear and thus it got a bad image (pun intended).
WebP is pretty good for replacing most GIFs.
JPEG XL is arguably better for static images, and it doesn't have AVIF's limitations.
PNG still rules for compatibility and pixel-perfect accuracy.
@@atemoc Know what's way better than GIFs? APNGs.
@@atemoc about GIFs, APNGs have better quality with smaller size.
"I got Rickrolled by XScreenSaver's privacy policy for Android"...
...is not a sentence I thought I would ever have to write in my entire existence. Yet here I am.
Never gonna give you up
Never gonna let you down
Never gonna run around and hurt you!
@@akam9919 Thats not the lyric...
Never gonna run around and desert you
Google protects your data from _everyone else_. They have a competitive advantage if only they have it.
Google will only protect your data from people who cannot afford to buy your data.
. . . except all of the advertisers that pay Google to show their ads. And governments.
@@logicalfundy advertisers dont get your data, they get your profile that Google makes using your data, but not the data itself, Google isn't stupid, if they just handed advertisers your data then advertisers would make their own advertising service with said data and under cut Google
@@logicalfundy They don't give the data to advertisers. Google is the advertiser, that's their whole business model. The US government could probably ask Google to give then whatever they want, and share it with their close allies, so I guess Five Eyes countries governments can access Google data, but no one else.
@@szaszm_ Google sells the spots to put the ads in, they don't make the ads themselves, and they share quite a bit of data, and there are a bunch of other middlemen too. The advertising industry is quite scary in its scale and scope.
I haven't been to JWZ's website in many years. It's good to know he's still out there, just being a boss.
It probably looks like it did the last time you saw it as well
When shell applications on the PlayStore get approved on their privacy policy, I'm convinced Google never looks at the policy until attention is brought to it.
considering the chromium project doesn't properly verify certificates (and it's a WONTFIX) I'm going to say they don't give a crap about security at all.
The chromium project doesn't properly WHAT
@@Redhotsmasher The savetheinternet pfp is already pretty topical for all this, but it *does* make me wish there was some kind of save the internet movement regarding the ever-encroaching total enshittification of the internet lmao
wtf
Multiple issues around "users aren't allowed to define which roots to trust."
So "your internal website which you know about but do not need or want anyone else to care about" is never trustworthy. But "sketchy Israeli-Chinese CA" can impersonate any website whenever they want until Google decides to revoke them.
Unlike Firefox, Chrome/chromium/etc. silently accepts MUST STAPLE certs that do not have attached revocation information. That allows an attacker to use a compromised and revoked certificate in an MITM attack, by just not attaching the revocation information.
Their own security documentation says this is the proper solution on the problem, they just won't implement it because.... reasons?
Note: To date every car i know of where a company claimed to be using data with permission, and in some cases even created it themselves, have been blatant lies.
It may sound dumb but I'm sure it ties in to stupid regulations where they want you to explicitly say in a legally binding document what data you use or don't use. And it's probably because a ton of scammy apps are uploaded without one and collect everything. So you need one even if it's to say "We collect nothing".
Permissions. How much more binding can you get than "physically impossible"?
@@PoldovicoGoogle removed the permissions that would be relevant. Every app has permission to violate your privacy that can't be turned off.
@@Poldovico Does google track info about who's installed apps and share that with the developers? Or it could load images through a url that tracks using cookies/etc.
Just because the app itself doesn't track anything doesn't mean there isn't still data associated with it that can be accessed/shared/etc.
@@smitty1 That would have to be covered by Google's privacy policy, not the app's.
The EU privacy act / GDPR requires to list things like "where the user can go to request deletion of their data", so from a business/legal perspective it's probably just least-effort to make it always be in the form then to check when which items apply.
Fun fact: A lot of (starter)devs seem to have tripped on the fact that if you are not collecting data directly in your app but run ads, your embedded ad system(AdMob) - and thus, your app by extension - does, in fact, collect data.
To be fair I think actually requiring a privacy policy for every app is a good thing.
Is it actually verifiable/enforced though?
@@johanngambolputty5351 What is important is not actual verification/enforcement, but the fact that developer becomes legally liable for violating the terms once they have been stated.
@@Eleyvie So there are potential repercussions (that's what I somewhat meant by enforcement), however, if you cannot verify they're keeping to their word, how does this ever come into play?
Edit: I guess it shows you have some skin in the game, opens you up to more consequences than might be there otherwise.
is good for google to not be responsible for the apps that are in play store.
I really want wayland screen savers even if it's silly.
same
IMO Google is not "the most rapacious privacy violator on the planet" - that crown belongs to Facebook.
I couldn't say, I don't touch anything facebook (knowingly). They seem easier to avoid, at least
FB/meta simply doesn't nearly have the reach of google.
Microsoft and apple are also the contenders
This was probably approved because, like almost everyone, Google skipped reading the Privacy Policy before accepting the terms.
There's an argument to be made here.
A big argument! 🤣
13:45 missed the chance to say: "don't be evil!"
The blog was a fun read. Thanks for sharing 👍
I hoped you'd say "annnd...... I'm never gonna give you up!" at the end…
Well, google will never give me up only so that they can run around and desert me.
Googles is an awful company - one which I've followed for years. To say its business practises are nefarious is an understatement - it's truly an 'evil' company... which is why I have to laugh at their former motto "Don't be evil".
They are not strictly evil, but they are greedy and shizofrenic, as every corporation is if you compare it to a person.
And I assume, unlike Google, XScreenSaver will not accidentally break a whole country's internet for hours.
That might happen. Software isn't free of bugs, and isn't always used appropriately.
it's not hard to beat google search these days
I'm going to be a bit contrarian and say that having a blanket privacy policy is not a bad thing. Yes, it's ironic that it's Google demanding it, and yes, it seems a bit goofy to apply it to a screensaver, but it's still a program that _potentially_ could have access to your data, if only through including a screenshot feature, say. Having a simple statement saying you won't do things like that isn't unreasonable.
What Google needs in this case is a standard boilerplate policy that can be simply c&p'd into your project with little modification.
You don't need a statement. You just need to not request permissions.
What more assurance do you want than it being technically impossible?
google was sued in the past because 3rd party apps collected user information without letting the user know.
They are protecting themselves, the app privacy policy is part of a contract between the app and the user, also it's probably better for google that they don't get involved as much in the privacy policy agreement in case the app decide to not follow it, they are likely trying to not be blamed for not enforcing an agreement the app developer wrote.
@@Poldovico Ok, prove that it's technically impossible, oh that would require manually reviewing the source code of every app on the playstore as well as double checking every update to the apps.
The far more maintainable policy is shifting the responsibility to the app developers with a blanket requirement for a privacy policy.
If your app doesn't collect anything, that's great put that in the privacy policy.
The real sketchy behavior would be to insist that "My App doesn't collect anything, but we don't need no privacy policy that actually says that, it can just be this little pinky promise here on the side".
If it's just tossed in that easily, it'll probably be wrong a lot of the time. The same way people click "next next next" and there's adware and malware all over their computer.
If it's just the default thing, it'll be tossed on whether applying or not, out of laziness or not caring about privacy policies.
Seems to me one now exists, since Xscreensaver took the trouble to create it ;)
Let's give it up for Jamie Zawinski, folks! He just got Google to tacitly admit that he was right about everything he said in this privacy policy by granting their approval.
Google: I approve of this message
Considering it's the Play Store, safe to say nobody (human) saw it
hilarious. I hope someone at google actually read it and laughed their ass off
Google: You need a Privacy Policy - it's the LAW!
Also Google: WE never READ it, we don't CARE.
Unlike Google, XScreensaver is no stranger to love
Now that sounds an awful lot like the last statement in that privacy policy …
I'm 100% stealing that privacy policy, if ever need one.
Honestly, there should be privacy policy even it just says "we don't collect any user data" so that there's something to enforce
Google cares about your privacy, or lack there of.
Even if you don't have any plan to use Xscreensaver, it's privacy policy page is now a great place to teach the average person just how awful Google is.
I use the contact on my phone, of my dad to store the GPS location of his gravesite, so the contact is still rather useful.
That last one XD
Albino indirectally appearing on both Xscreensaver's privacy policy and in Brodie's video because of a dishwasher is so fun to me
XScreensaver's privacy policy should be adopted by every other privacy based application. period. It is the best.
The thing about Google's LLM is that it's not just that they don't filter out Reddit, they paid Reddit to allow them to train their LLM on their website.
Which everyone agreed to when creating their reddit account, because they couldn't see any way reddit could sell their shitposts for $$
Thank you for this!!!
I was about to add to your first statement “as long as they can’t profit off of violating it” but yeah you got that covered
Excellent video 👍 Thank you 💜
That last line in that privacy policy though 🤣
XScreenSaver for my phone? Bouncing cows please.
This was a triumph. XScreenSaver is making a note here, huge success!
This reminds me of the time when I had to make a privacy policy for my discord bots. It was really just like "I only collect the information the user provides directly to the bot through commands" and like, I don't sell user data. I wouldn't even know how I would go about doing that shit, even if I wanted to
Don't use xscreensaver, but like it a lot more than Google.
I need to keep this in mind when I have to setup a privacy policy myself
They're not just wallpapers but also screensavers since Android does have that too.
Jamie Zawinski has been trolling people his whole life.
I missed so many of these google shenanigans, this is hilarious thank you for covering this.
This also proves they never actually check policies and whether is said there is true. Any scammy app can write a perfect privacy policy but do whatever they want with data🤷♀️
Yesss daily dose of tech drama provided by Brodie
This is a glorious privacy policy ❤
What an exquisite shitpost!
That video at the end got me thinking about why I don't consider Ubuntu as a Linux Distribution, but a Cannonical's Distribution.
This was brilliant and hilarious! 😄👏
Unlike google I will never gonna let you troll me using that last link.
Low key it’s a good document to have to have a quick to access list of bad things google did and do if you get into an argument xD
Making fun of google a fun thing to do, but sometimes things are not so clear. For example copyright: There are some wild stories about google false copyright claims, but at the same time google copyright system is solving a lot of problems (look at Tom Scott video about that "RUclips's copyright system isn't broken. The world's is.")
a company that caves in to a broken world is a broken company
jwz has always been a character. He was a Netscape dev and was there for M$ destroying Netscape and the company's transformation into to Mozilla, and at the end of the saga he just writes, "I have an honest business now. I sell beer." ;)
That's true
I was facetiming with a American friend and when I search pragerU in Japan said is a leader of conservative education. Meanwhile when he searched said pragerU is not an educational institution.
Both google
Google asked for it. Google got trolled by JWZ.😂
I experienced the white noise one once! thankfully it was reverted on appeal.
This is just a result of some Countries requiring a Privacy Policy and the play store happens to serve this content in those regions and has to comply...
If that were the case, the privacy policy could be optional and the app just not available in countries where one is required. This *is* Google demanding a privacy policy, even if it's just to make things slightly easier for themselves.
You guys have to realize that even in the US the app store is require by multiple acts to disclose which apps collect information, the same goes for Europe.
Google has been sued multiple times in the US for 3rd party apps that collected user information without disclosing it.
The privacy policy is part of a contract between the app and the user, and helps google protect itself if an app does something without telling the user, tho this is ironic because google itself is also a bad actor.
unlike google we don't host 80% of the csam material in holland
Ah, yeah, I was forced to also add a privacy policy to an app I made in a day so Google wouldn't close my Dev account, it's just a link to which ever site is hosting your policy, I made a markdown file, uploaded it to github, and linked that, I can guarantee you Google isn't looking over the policies.
Unlike Google, XScreenSaver will never use a fully automated system to verify the existence of a privacy policy.
Google approved the privacy policy, so it must be canon!
This should be the standard privacy policy adopted by open source projects.
Who knew I needed a screensaver!
Unlike Google, XScreenSaver will never put up a nag screen telling you to update your softwa--oh...
Screensavers became obsolete with Cathode-ray tube displays in about 2008.
"Why do you hate joy?" -- XScreensaver author, same guy as behind this privacy policy. :D
This is so great
And yet we all watch this video on Google's youtube.
privacy policy is a rick roll , thats the best
This is why I love Jamie Zawinski. The man is a bit of a godfather of the World Wide Web. But he's also one of us.
The privacy policy is most likely just a checkbox. Your privacy policy could be: "we collect no user data" and it'll pass
It's not just Google on the recent bad AI answers. Just ask Alexa "How many rocks should I eat" and get the same result that made Google so much fun. 🤣
Surely this must've been automatically approved. I can't imagine a google employee actually seeing this and thinking "yeah, that's fine"
There are people at every company working just hard enough to collect the paycheck.
@@mallninja9805 Yeah I guess, but Google approaches hiring with this real feudal overlord attitude. You are privileged to work for Google and their HR department will make sure you know if you try to back out.
I really love this. 🤣
I just installed XscreenSaver for no other reason other than this golden privacy policy, where can I send this amazing lad some money too?
My favorite XScreenSaver is Headroom; also works great on Android.
"XScreensaver"? They better call it "Unlike Google".
Nah. XScreensaver is literally older than Google. Why should it change for this upstart? ;)
I'm not _quite_ sure that's true, I might be thinking of XLock which is older still and shares many of the same screensavers, but I think it is.
1:00 the Android SDK is proprietary. I wonder what it injects into the code, and how / whether developers can "opt out" at compile-time...
This is a triumph.
Xscreensaver can cause in some persons unexpected hallucinogenic effects.
How could you replicate these effects? Asking for a friend
@@FelipeV3444 It id gift, but also open source.
"The tune being used wasn't even a tune that should have been able to be used in the content id system. It was based on something from 1817"; actually, music that's public domain can still be under copyright. There's two different copyrights on music, the composition, and the performance - so whilst the written music may be public domain, the recording itself can be legitimately flagged in the system. Of course, because the system can't tell the difference between similar performances, you can end up with claims on your own recordings of public domain works...
That developer is a god!!!!
if you share this with your normie friends and family, their response will show how much "willful" there is in willful ignorance.
i bet AI tells you to put toothpaste under your CPU to gain more FPS. oh wait thats me.
Remember everyone, Google or any other cloud is SOMEONE ELSE'S COMPUTER - If they want to mess with your files or prevent you from using them they can (yes, they can get sued too)
I knew the Xscreensaver dev was someone special when I first visited their website, but I clearly didn't expect that lol
You should check out his flame war with the Debian maintainers of his screensaver
jwz's site has always been great. The thing on there that gets me is his fish heads story.
@@peacefroglorax875 I know, I was like "what the hell, chill man..."
"... I'm gonna say something controversial..." when is that new for you? 😁
Facts, this explains also how good has so much money to give free or "free" services for so long. Double edge sword?
Actually a really cool collection of live wallpapers on Android if you're into that sort of thing
I used to use it that way on Linux between about '99 and 2009 I guess. All the actual screensavers can draw into the root window. Gnome, KDE & some window managers break it with their virtual root windows, but I never liked the big desktops and there were plenty of window managers to choose from.