Well, that's a terrible example. The Facebook app pretty much is malware already.
Kidding aside, I have more or less come to the conclusion that almost all pre-installed software is malware or crapware. When I bought my last phone there was a bunch of garbage the carrier had put on it which I couldn't uninstall, but could only disable.
Why the hell can't I, as the owner of the device, uninstall a piece of software? Because some asshole in marketing decided so? That shouldn't even be possible.
It's still dodgy side-loaded stuff, it's just been put on by the people who sold it to you.
Which is why the owner of the phone needs to have the ability to uninstall any damned app instead of having shitware put on my the carrier or vendor be something you can't get rid of... and why we need the ability to enforce granular permissions on everything an app wants to do.
Most apps exist to do one of two things: steal your information, or deliver ads. Which is why I have give up on any app which has a corresponding web-page.
Increasingly I just don't trust the companies who make apps, and assume they're all going to act like assholes. Usually they do.
Blah blah blah... you're so heartbroken that someone didn't include in the headline what was included in TFS. You didn't even need to read TFA.
Whining, bitching, helpless and pointless. Woe is you.
Get over your damned self, subscribe to a security twitter feed, and stop bitching about something so damned pointless as to make you sound like a spoiled child with ADD.
The swooning must be fucking unbearable. I mean you are absolutely stricken with the vapors, it must be hard on you.
Now go get yourself a clean pair of panties, and shut up already. The information you wanted was there. That you feel the need to be so laboriously and meticulously pandered to tells me that you're bitching for the sake of bitching.
Boo hoo, your penis is small and you demand information be applied to you in precisely the way you envisioned or the world is unjust.
Or, you know, you read a couple of fucking sentences and stop being a whiny little idiot about it. From time to time in the world, you will be called upon to RTFA, and if you can't do that, RTFS.
Wah wah wah.. put it all in the headline lest you get distracted and don't know what it means.
Yes, to put a fine point on it: IoT is bullshit, lies, marketing, and empty promises, hawking solutions nobody really gives a crap about, using technology which doesn't really yet exist.
Because there simply is no answer. It's literally people trying to get other people to pay for the development costs to find out what it is and what it's good for.
There is no consistent definition, no standards, not even any really good use cases.
It's something people have latched onto, and decided that, even if they have no idea what it means, they want to cash in on it.
People have come up with some things around it, but they've not addressed any real world issues like privacy, security, or what the hell to do with it. It's like in the late 90's, where the frenzy happened around "teh dot com" -- if you had a frickin' website, you had VCs throwing you enough money to make some people rich, and ensure there would be a healthy resale market for Herman Miller Aeron chairs.
You didn't need a business plan, a product, or any actual skills in running a business. It was simply a feeding frenzy of stupidity.
IoT is a bunch of people trying to capitalize on a buzzword nobody can define, with technology nobody has yet built, and trying to find other people to help pay for it. It's a though experiment by people who have read far too much science fiction.
Nobody can answer any of these questions because they're still making it up. It's a gold rush to build vapor ware.
It's breathless futurists telling us this is the future without being able to tell us why or how or what we'd do with it. As I said, it's snake oil, nothing more.
It's literally years away from anybody even being able to give plausible use cases, and several years further away from anybody giving a damn about it.
Internet of Things isn't even a thing, it's wishful thinking, and a bunch of random crap "visionaries" with no business plan are all pushing as the Next Big Thing.
It's marketing hype by people trying to cash in, but who otherwise have no idea what it's good for.
It's snake oil, nothing more. Getting fast talked into spending money on pilot projects to help some company achieve their goal of "monetizing your synergies while holistically marketing the awesomeness of IoT to allow you to improve your "'Smart City Rating' means you've been hoodwinked.
If it's so awesome and revolutionary, you should be paying the city to promote your product.
Instead it's just a bunch of bullshit and lies about how unfinished tech with no actual value is going to revolutionize the world.
Every idiot who says "Yarg, teh internet of things" should get swiftly smacked in the head. Because other than they want a piece of the action, not a single one of them can tell you what it is and why you actually want it.
Getting suckered into spending public money to allow some idiot to let you help him figure out what this crap is for is a sure sign you're not doing enough due diligence.
I'm glad to see people like this starting to say "go away and leave us alone". Because there's nothing there yet, just some speculative crap.
It's a solution in search of a problem, and a bunch of people trying to get other people help them figure out the business plan and what this stuff is for.
Suddenly everybody wants a piece of you and you have to distrust their motivations. Because the amount of people looking to sink in their teeth isn't going to be small.
Conversely, how do you expect to have a normal relationship with a non-wealthy person? Suddenly they're trying to keep up with a zillionaire and haven't got the means... which means they're living on the charity of rich people and whatever their mood does. That tends to be present no matter how much you want it to not be. Get into a fight in some faraway location you can't afford to be in on your own, and you're a nobody.
Get rich over time, and you can build up some friends in the same situation. Get rick quickly and you can't. In which case you better hope your family and your existing friends can cope with it.
I've seen TV shows with some lottery winners... and they constantly get letters from random people looking to get handouts, or people trying to scam them. Because people are greedy bastards. Oh, and the other rich people want nothing to do with you because you're new money.
I've always said I have no interest in being rich and famous... I want to be rich and anonymous, precisely because I don't want to deal with this bullshit.
The real question is... as tragic as this is, how much sympathy do recent billionaires expect from the rest of us? The whole "I'm a billionaire, now what?" is one of those questions which you can't expect a serious or helpful answer from anybody who hasn't done it.
We should be very clear this means "the (m|b)illionaire CEOs of tech corporations who are using company money to advance their own agendas".
This is all about corporations doing what serves the interests of the rich people in charge... which means it's really a measure of how influential CEOs are, and is in no way representative of the thousands of people who work for those companies.
It's not a tweet, it's a story submission... if headlines read like "Over 225,000 Apple Accounts Compromised Via iOS Malware but only if you jailbroke your phone and installed from a separate source but then that's your damned problem because you did it to yourself but it's Monday so who cares anyway because I need more coffee" it would be annoying and would get truncated.
Honestly, this is you complaining about your lack of attention to read TFS.
The story submission is fine. It's demanding you not have to read a couple of sentences which is the problem.
Would this be any different with Android or Microsoft?
Root your device, and install software from unknown places... and guess what... it doesn't matter whose damned platform you're running.
Hell, you can get malware from using download.com, cnet and other places too.
News flash... installing software from unknown sources can be a security risk no matter what your damned platform.
Apple (or any other vendor) can't do a damned thing to protect your security when you go to great lengths to install software from sources you can't trust.
The theft is executed via variants of the KeyRaider iOS malware, which targets jailbroken iOS devices. Most of the victims are Chinese â" the malware is distributed through third-party Cydia repositories in China
The headline might leave it out, but the summary sure makes it plain.
It's like native encryption without backdoors... if you build it right, you can't access it.
If they build it so they can remotely administer your network, they are 100% guaranteed to have to hand it over later.
Given the current context, there simply is now way in hell Google can build this device and not 100% know they're creating a device with a massive security backdoor.
Unless they have created magical technology which they can access but which can't be hacked, and they can access to update it but which can't be provided to law enforcement... what they've done is create a device which will be exploitable, and which is so heavily optimized to push their own services as to be a giant security and privacy hole waiting to happen.
We need to be entering an era where our private home networks don't have remote admin passwords which can be used against us.
If all of our stuff is going to be networked, having us be the gatekeepers for our own security is paramount.
Because you can't design something intended to be remotely accessible and not expect there is a likelihood of someone else being able to access it.
Sorry, but this device is idiotic. It gives Google the ability to entirely remotely control your network from outside, is entirely designed to facilitate their own services, and will become a privacy nightmare... because if they can access it, someone else can, and law enforcement will be able to go to them and say "OK, we need access to that network, you have to give it to us".
This is the "bend over and take it" device which puts control of your home network in the hands of Google.. primarily to benefit Google.
This is a terrible idea, and it's not something I'd trust even a little. This is all about locking you into Google, and making it easy for them to manage your home remotely.
Yes, as a matter of fact. Bush was too incompetent to know his flunky was too incompetent:
the Democratic lawmaker cited several e-mails that he said show Brown's failures. In one, as employees looked for direction and support on the ravaged Gulf Coast, Brown offered to "tweak" the federal response.
Two days after Katrina hit, Marty Bahamonde, one of the only FEMA employees in New Orleans, wrote to Brown that "the situation is past critical" and listed problems including many people near death and food and water running out at the Superdome.
Brown's entire response was: "Thanks for the update. Anything specific I need to do or tweak?" (Copies of e-mails posted by critic -- PDF)
On September 12 Brown resigned, 10 days after President Bush told him, "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job."
And, in case you don't scroll far enough in that article:
Brown took over FEMA in 2003 with little experience in emergency management. He joined the agency in 2001 as legal counsel to his friend, then-FEMA director Joe Allbaugh, who was Bush's 2000 campaign manager. When Allbaugh left FEMA in 2003 Brown assumed the top job.
Before joining the Bush administration, Brown spent a decade as the stewards and judges commissioner of the International Arabian Horse Association.
So, a man without proper experience failed to act and then offered to "tweak" the response, as if it was a minor thing.
So how about you stop thinking of this as a partisan issue. It really does come down to an unqualified crony of Bush failing to act, and Bush acting like it was all going according to plan.
But it is always more convenient to blame your political opponent, even if it is lazy.
Yes, yes it is. Only in this case it's you doing that.
Alright, smartass... I'm going to make up a thought experiment, because I really have no idea how this shit works either.
Say I have locations A and B, each with the end point of two pairs of entangled particles. Say they're 1 light year apart.
At site A, the first particle of the first pair is in a state, but you can't see it. At site B, the second particle of the first pair can be read. Site B knows the state of the first pair, site A doesn't.
If site B flipped their part of the second pair into a known state which told you the state of the first pair, hasn't that information traveled faster than light.
Because surely I can come up with some number of entangled pairs which allows me to send Morse code from site B to site A, no? Eight pairs lets me send a byte?
You may not be able to add information later, but can't you use other ones to relay information.
I never really understand this, but it seems like you can combine more than one entangled pair to construct a scenario in which you can send data faster than the speed of light.
Site B instantly knows the state of your particles in site A, and can then force other particles into states which relay that information back... if this takes less than two years, isn't it, by definition, faster than light?
(I don't claim this is valid, and I'm not sure it is, I'm just trying to wrap my head around this)
You know, reading the above I have to say I think your conclusion about open source is complete crap here.
An architect who is designing and building it at the same time, and doing stupid shortcuts and hacks in the process, is going to lead to terrible results no matter your damned platform. The architect designs, the admin and IT people build and maintain. If you design is any good, they can built it. If your design is crap, they'll come back to you.
But architecting and building at the same time usually means you have a bunch of undocumented crap, shortcuts, and things you abandoned but actually are why some of your other stuff works even if you don't realize it.
This has nothing whatsoever to do with open source software or operating systems... and it has everything to do with bad practices done by people who think they know how to do both things at the same time.
Claiming open source solves these problems is missing the actual problem.. that an architect hacking it together until it works isn't an architect, and the system you end up with is probably un-maintainable because it's full of so many kludges and workarounds as to be garbage. You separate these things so you know you actually have a viable architecture instead of a fluke.
Don't look at the specific examples and blame Windows. Look a the incredibly stupid way it was built and realize you'd be screwed no matter the platform if your "architect" it by throwing pieces at it until it works and then not knowing why it works.
That's the opposite of being an architect. It's being a complete hack with no business calling themselves an architect.
What we really need is to put some pressure on advertising companies
No, see that implies we trust them, wish to engage with them, and want to negotiate a future in which they are an integral part of the web.
That means they've won.
Yes, installing ad blockers will put pressure on them. But let's make it perfectly clear: we don't see it as their right to track us, collect data about us, and inject themselves into the conversation.
Cut them out entirely, and leave them cut out. The 7 analytics companies on this page right now, and the dozens I see on every page I visit... I have no intention of ever giving them access to my machine as long as I have technology to prevent it.
But not for a minute will I pretend that this is a negotiation with them. Once you install things like HTTP Switchboard, or Request Policy, or Script Safe and realize just how much shit is in the average web page, you realize that trying to find a good solution is a losing prospect.
Don't pander to corporate greed, and don't act like you will find a solution which is equitable. Because they're not interested in giving it to you, so don't get suckered into giving it to them.
Most of these ad and analytics companies are just parasites. And there's way too damned many of them to think you'll ever come out well in that conversation.
However they do not think that the position should have full access to the environment. It is an "architecture" position and not a "sysadmin" position is how they explained it to me. That seems insane. It is like asking someone to draw a map, without being able to actually visit the place that needs to be mapped.
The architect is the "big picture guy", he should be able to design it and explain it. But he sure as hell shouldn't be running it.
The architect is most decidedly not the sysadmin, he's there for strategic and long term planning, but not day to day stuff.
If you want to be both the architect and the admin, you'll do a piss poor job of both, and likely cause more problems than you realize. I've met a few architects who thought they should still keep their fingers on the switch, so to speak... and as they generally made a hash of things because they didn't have the time to be good admins, and though they knew everything at all times.
An architect who thinks he's ad admin is someone who has delusions of being able to do everything, and ends up doing everything badly.
Your management is right, it's an either or thing.
If your organization is small enough you can do both, you're not really an architect. If it's large enough to need an architect, it also needs a sysadmin. It doesn't need some guy who thinks he can do both.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, that's a terrible example. The Facebook app pretty much is malware already.
Kidding aside, I have more or less come to the conclusion that almost all pre-installed software is malware or crapware. When I bought my last phone there was a bunch of garbage the carrier had put on it which I couldn't uninstall, but could only disable.
Why the hell can't I, as the owner of the device, uninstall a piece of software? Because some asshole in marketing decided so? That shouldn't even be possible.
It's still dodgy side-loaded stuff, it's just been put on by the people who sold it to you.
Which is why the owner of the phone needs to have the ability to uninstall any damned app instead of having shitware put on my the carrier or vendor be something you can't get rid of ... and why we need the ability to enforce granular permissions on everything an app wants to do.
Most apps exist to do one of two things: steal your information, or deliver ads. Which is why I have give up on any app which has a corresponding web-page.
Increasingly I just don't trust the companies who make apps, and assume they're all going to act like assholes. Usually they do.
Enough to know they don't give a shit about "legal".
That doesn't make it right.
So have we come full circle where the FBI just keeps files on everybody?
This sounds awfully creepy, and smacks of an organization obsessed with tracking everybody they can.
Blah blah blah ... you're so heartbroken that someone didn't include in the headline what was included in TFS. You didn't even need to read TFA.
Whining, bitching, helpless and pointless. Woe is you.
Get over your damned self, subscribe to a security twitter feed, and stop bitching about something so damned pointless as to make you sound like a spoiled child with ADD.
The swooning must be fucking unbearable. I mean you are absolutely stricken with the vapors, it must be hard on you.
Now go get yourself a clean pair of panties, and shut up already. The information you wanted was there. That you feel the need to be so laboriously and meticulously pandered to tells me that you're bitching for the sake of bitching.
Boo hoo, your penis is small and you demand information be applied to you in precisely the way you envisioned or the world is unjust.
Or, you know, you read a couple of fucking sentences and stop being a whiny little idiot about it. From time to time in the world, you will be called upon to RTFA, and if you can't do that, RTFS.
Wah wah wah .. put it all in the headline lest you get distracted and don't know what it means.
How the hell did you get a 7 digit ID again?
Yes, to put a fine point on it: IoT is bullshit, lies, marketing, and empty promises, hawking solutions nobody really gives a crap about, using technology which doesn't really yet exist.
Because there simply is no answer. It's literally people trying to get other people to pay for the development costs to find out what it is and what it's good for.
There is no consistent definition, no standards, not even any really good use cases.
It's something people have latched onto, and decided that, even if they have no idea what it means, they want to cash in on it.
People have come up with some things around it, but they've not addressed any real world issues like privacy, security, or what the hell to do with it. It's like in the late 90's, where the frenzy happened around "teh dot com" -- if you had a frickin' website, you had VCs throwing you enough money to make some people rich, and ensure there would be a healthy resale market for Herman Miller Aeron chairs.
You didn't need a business plan, a product, or any actual skills in running a business. It was simply a feeding frenzy of stupidity.
IoT is a bunch of people trying to capitalize on a buzzword nobody can define, with technology nobody has yet built, and trying to find other people to help pay for it. It's a though experiment by people who have read far too much science fiction.
Nobody can answer any of these questions because they're still making it up. It's a gold rush to build vapor ware.
It's breathless futurists telling us this is the future without being able to tell us why or how or what we'd do with it. As I said, it's snake oil, nothing more.
It's literally years away from anybody even being able to give plausible use cases, and several years further away from anybody giving a damn about it.
Internet of Things isn't even a thing, it's wishful thinking, and a bunch of random crap "visionaries" with no business plan are all pushing as the Next Big Thing.
It's marketing hype by people trying to cash in, but who otherwise have no idea what it's good for.
It's snake oil, nothing more. Getting fast talked into spending money on pilot projects to help some company achieve their goal of "monetizing your synergies while holistically marketing the awesomeness of IoT to allow you to improve your "'Smart City Rating' means you've been hoodwinked.
If it's so awesome and revolutionary, you should be paying the city to promote your product.
Instead it's just a bunch of bullshit and lies about how unfinished tech with no actual value is going to revolutionize the world.
Every idiot who says "Yarg, teh internet of things" should get swiftly smacked in the head. Because other than they want a piece of the action, not a single one of them can tell you what it is and why you actually want it.
Getting suckered into spending public money to allow some idiot to let you help him figure out what this crap is for is a sure sign you're not doing enough due diligence.
I'm glad to see people like this starting to say "go away and leave us alone". Because there's nothing there yet, just some speculative crap.
It's a solution in search of a problem, and a bunch of people trying to get other people help them figure out the business plan and what this stuff is for.
Suddenly everybody wants a piece of you and you have to distrust their motivations. Because the amount of people looking to sink in their teeth isn't going to be small.
Conversely, how do you expect to have a normal relationship with a non-wealthy person? Suddenly they're trying to keep up with a zillionaire and haven't got the means ... which means they're living on the charity of rich people and whatever their mood does. That tends to be present no matter how much you want it to not be. Get into a fight in some faraway location you can't afford to be in on your own, and you're a nobody.
Get rich over time, and you can build up some friends in the same situation. Get rick quickly and you can't. In which case you better hope your family and your existing friends can cope with it.
I've seen TV shows with some lottery winners ... and they constantly get letters from random people looking to get handouts, or people trying to scam them. Because people are greedy bastards. Oh, and the other rich people want nothing to do with you because you're new money.
I've always said I have no interest in being rich and famous ... I want to be rich and anonymous, precisely because I don't want to deal with this bullshit.
The real question is ... as tragic as this is, how much sympathy do recent billionaires expect from the rest of us? The whole "I'm a billionaire, now what?" is one of those questions which you can't expect a serious or helpful answer from anybody who hasn't done it.
We should be very clear this means "the (m|b)illionaire CEOs of tech corporations who are using company money to advance their own agendas".
This is all about corporations doing what serves the interests of the rich people in charge ... which means it's really a measure of how influential CEOs are, and is in no way representative of the thousands of people who work for those companies.
It's not a tweet, it's a story submission ... if headlines read like "Over 225,000 Apple Accounts Compromised Via iOS Malware but only if you jailbroke your phone and installed from a separate source but then that's your damned problem because you did it to yourself but it's Monday so who cares anyway because I need more coffee" it would be annoying and would get truncated.
Honestly, this is you complaining about your lack of attention to read TFS.
The story submission is fine. It's demanding you not have to read a couple of sentences which is the problem.
So, read the entire summary ... and you too, can knowing at a glance, that this doesn't affect you.
Just like the rest of us knowinged it.
The knowing is available for anybody willing to read as many as four sentences.
The glancing and the knowing are free. The lack of glancing at the knowing isn't a limitation of the story or the submission.
Would this be any different with Android or Microsoft?
Root your device, and install software from unknown places ... and guess what ... it doesn't matter whose damned platform you're running.
Hell, you can get malware from using download.com, cnet and other places too.
News flash ... installing software from unknown sources can be a security risk no matter what your damned platform.
Apple (or any other vendor) can't do a damned thing to protect your security when you go to great lengths to install software from sources you can't trust.
Oh, really?
The headline might leave it out, but the summary sure makes it plain.
It's like native encryption without backdoors ... if you build it right, you can't access it.
If they build it so they can remotely administer your network, they are 100% guaranteed to have to hand it over later.
Given the current context, there simply is now way in hell Google can build this device and not 100% know they're creating a device with a massive security backdoor.
Unless they have created magical technology which they can access but which can't be hacked, and they can access to update it but which can't be provided to law enforcement ... what they've done is create a device which will be exploitable, and which is so heavily optimized to push their own services as to be a giant security and privacy hole waiting to happen.
We need to be entering an era where our private home networks don't have remote admin passwords which can be used against us.
If all of our stuff is going to be networked, having us be the gatekeepers for our own security is paramount.
Because you can't design something intended to be remotely accessible and not expect there is a likelihood of someone else being able to access it.
That's probably the only ethernet port.
Sorry, but this device is idiotic. It gives Google the ability to entirely remotely control your network from outside, is entirely designed to facilitate their own services, and will become a privacy nightmare ... because if they can access it, someone else can, and law enforcement will be able to go to them and say "OK, we need access to that network, you have to give it to us".
This is the "bend over and take it" device which puts control of your home network in the hands of Google .. primarily to benefit Google.
This is a terrible idea, and it's not something I'd trust even a little. This is all about locking you into Google, and making it easy for them to manage your home remotely.
I would put absolutely zero trust in this device.
Is this an actual industry?
Wow, I'm out of touch with this stuff.
Than all of them, probably.
The guy who ran a website for cheaters was always open about that fact.
I'm less convinced in the transparency or honesty of pretty much any political candidate.
Here's two more: papers please.
Congratulations, the US is well and truly on its way to a police state.
Now we're all fucked.
Freedom is slavery, bitches.
"Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job"
Yes, as a matter of fact. Bush was too incompetent to know his flunky was too incompetent:
And, in case you don't scroll far enough in that article:
So, a man without proper experience failed to act and then offered to "tweak" the response, as if it was a minor thing.
So how about you stop thinking of this as a partisan issue. It really does come down to an unqualified crony of Bush failing to act, and Bush acting like it was all going according to plan.
Yes, yes it is. Only in this case it's you doing that.
Alright, smartass ... I'm going to make up a thought experiment, because I really have no idea how this shit works either.
Say I have locations A and B, each with the end point of two pairs of entangled particles. Say they're 1 light year apart.
At site A, the first particle of the first pair is in a state, but you can't see it. At site B, the second particle of the first pair can be read. Site B knows the state of the first pair, site A doesn't.
If site B flipped their part of the second pair into a known state which told you the state of the first pair, hasn't that information traveled faster than light.
Because surely I can come up with some number of entangled pairs which allows me to send Morse code from site B to site A, no? Eight pairs lets me send a byte?
You may not be able to add information later, but can't you use other ones to relay information.
I never really understand this, but it seems like you can combine more than one entangled pair to construct a scenario in which you can send data faster than the speed of light.
Site B instantly knows the state of your particles in site A, and can then force other particles into states which relay that information back ... if this takes less than two years, isn't it, by definition, faster than light?
(I don't claim this is valid, and I'm not sure it is, I'm just trying to wrap my head around this)
Every time this topic comes up, someone says "teh mirrors".
And then someone else points out the duration and intensity of these lasers would simply ablate any mirroring before it had a chance to do any good.
So I'm going to assume this still won't work.
You know, reading the above I have to say I think your conclusion about open source is complete crap here.
An architect who is designing and building it at the same time, and doing stupid shortcuts and hacks in the process, is going to lead to terrible results no matter your damned platform. The architect designs, the admin and IT people build and maintain. If you design is any good, they can built it. If your design is crap, they'll come back to you.
But architecting and building at the same time usually means you have a bunch of undocumented crap, shortcuts, and things you abandoned but actually are why some of your other stuff works even if you don't realize it.
This has nothing whatsoever to do with open source software or operating systems ... and it has everything to do with bad practices done by people who think they know how to do both things at the same time.
Claiming open source solves these problems is missing the actual problem .. that an architect hacking it together until it works isn't an architect, and the system you end up with is probably un-maintainable because it's full of so many kludges and workarounds as to be garbage. You separate these things so you know you actually have a viable architecture instead of a fluke.
Don't look at the specific examples and blame Windows. Look a the incredibly stupid way it was built and realize you'd be screwed no matter the platform if your "architect" it by throwing pieces at it until it works and then not knowing why it works.
That's the opposite of being an architect. It's being a complete hack with no business calling themselves an architect.
No, see that implies we trust them, wish to engage with them, and want to negotiate a future in which they are an integral part of the web.
That means they've won.
Yes, installing ad blockers will put pressure on them. But let's make it perfectly clear: we don't see it as their right to track us, collect data about us, and inject themselves into the conversation.
Cut them out entirely, and leave them cut out. The 7 analytics companies on this page right now, and the dozens I see on every page I visit ... I have no intention of ever giving them access to my machine as long as I have technology to prevent it.
But not for a minute will I pretend that this is a negotiation with them. Once you install things like HTTP Switchboard, or Request Policy, or Script Safe and realize just how much shit is in the average web page, you realize that trying to find a good solution is a losing prospect.
Don't pander to corporate greed, and don't act like you will find a solution which is equitable. Because they're not interested in giving it to you, so don't get suckered into giving it to them.
Most of these ad and analytics companies are just parasites. And there's way too damned many of them to think you'll ever come out well in that conversation.
The architect is the "big picture guy", he should be able to design it and explain it. But he sure as hell shouldn't be running it.
The architect is most decidedly not the sysadmin, he's there for strategic and long term planning, but not day to day stuff.
If you want to be both the architect and the admin, you'll do a piss poor job of both, and likely cause more problems than you realize. I've met a few architects who thought they should still keep their fingers on the switch, so to speak ... and as they generally made a hash of things because they didn't have the time to be good admins, and though they knew everything at all times.
An architect who thinks he's ad admin is someone who has delusions of being able to do everything, and ends up doing everything badly.
Your management is right, it's an either or thing.
If your organization is small enough you can do both, you're not really an architect. If it's large enough to need an architect, it also needs a sysadmin. It doesn't need some guy who thinks he can do both.