Wow, this is cool. a library of apps that operate on the principle of you own your own data, locally and are merely giving the app permission to access.
zero data apps.

https://0data.app
/cc
@natecull @alcinnz

@zens @natecull @alcinnz I was going to ask "so is this like remoteStorage/unhosted but my data is local instead of on the network", but turns out this is not a protocol, just a very general label for "app is somewhere, your data is somewhere else controlled by you and you delegate access to it" and remoteStorage is listed as one example of a protocol that fits the label.

@clacke @natecull @alcinnz @zens the part I don't get about this model is: once you've delegated access to part of your data to a remote app, you've lost control of that part of your data, have you not?

At least in the sense that you don't know where your data is going beyond the app you delegated to.

I understand that you don't lose access to your own data, which is good, but that's only half the problem IMO.

@teleclimber @clacke @natecull @zens That's true today! The remote app can promise to not keep the data, digital platforms can pretend it's more than a promise. But ultimately you have to trust the remote app.

If you want it to be otherwise, the software needs to run locally & be auditable. That's just how computers work.

@alcinnz @teleclimber @clacke @natecull until someone can figure out some kind of zero knowledge way of doing useful operations on encrypted data other than simply storing it.

Maybe something with VMs or encrypted enclaves/sandboxes? Even amazon could *technically* look at basically all the data on the planet that they host, which is a lot. we only have their promise that they don't.

Until then data needs to be wherever the code is.

@alcinnz @teleclimber @clacke @natecull
but of course, the real danger is not any individual person losing their privacy (though that certainly can be dangerous, e.g. ex husbands/stalkers/predators), but having so *much* data in onee place that you can do intelligence analysis on it- Something that facebook, for instance, probably doesn't do, exactly- but certainly gets done by third parties that facebook licenses data to, e.g. russian intelligence agencies.

@alcinnz @teleclimber @clacke @natecull so even if amazon is telling the truth, we still have to trust the security of their platform, and that any change in their leadership won't change their "don't look inside the vms" policy. (another nuance people frequently overlook. you not only need to trust the owner, but also any future owners, or future versions of that owner)

@zens @alcinnz @teleclimber @clacke

And in fact I'm pretty sure that Amazon and Azure would both have fine print in their contract saying that "for purposes of national security / law enforcement, we can do anything" because otherwise, what happens when ISIS or Stormfront or the Proud Boys are running encrypted tactical chat on a VM planning an operation, is military intelligence supposed to just sit back and say "welp we can't do anything because Gentleman Don't Read Mail"?

@natecull @alcinnz @teleclimber @clacke that’s precisely what amazon should do if they want foreign governments and corporations to continue putting all their eggs in the amazon basket. otherwise i have no clue hpw amazon convinced them to do that.