fwiw, I have given up debating with Tavis for this reason - it is not an actual discussion that could lead to results.
Nobody is proposing deploying DoH in such a way that cannot be disabled by the owner. If anyone did do such a user hostile thing, then what difference does it make, they could just use a custom protocol anyway.
-
-
There's little doubt that it *will* happen. Nest/Chromecast products hardcode 8.8.8.8, enforcing DoH isnt a reach. The argument: "they could just use a custom protocol anyway" is analogous to "well they could just develop an exploit". It's a non-argument.
-
You're asking me to argue for something that I don't agree with, hasn't happened, and that nobody has proposed. I don't know what you want me to say. It's not analogous, we agree not allowing owner to disable DoH is user-hostile, right? Why would hostility only be limited to DoH?
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
