Yeah fine, but perhaps some explanation of what I would be seeing if I did that would be appreciated. If you want me to enable Javascript, you should at least tell me what you're going to do with that.
If you make a web site with functionality that requires Javascript, and there's no other way, that's fine. But you should still leave the bits that don't need Javascript up, so we can see what we are missing.
I think that's possibly more important than claiming that you won't do any tracking. You sound like a trustworthy person, I'm sure, but of course the less reputable web sites could well claim they don't do any tracking, but then do tracking.
The first paragraph is a way to say "This is what you get when you switch Javascript on", and the second is "This is what you don't get when you switch Javascript on". Different messages. The first is verifiable useful information. The second is harder to verify.
And yes, I agree it is tragic that the world has reached this point.
When you open a new website, only the previously whitelisted JS sources are enabled, and you can individually check out the initially disabled sites to see if you want to trust it to run on your machine.
So, yes, having some default information about the code required to view the basic site would definitely be helpful, and help build trust.
[1] https://github.com/hackademix/noscript [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NoScript#ClearClick_(anti-clic...
I know it's probably not this simple, but it seems to me that if you're at the point where you're installing apps to take action in the case you're incapacitated by abuse, you should probably skip the app part and just take that action immediately...
The problem is that even though this support network exists, victims often have their phones taken away from their abusers so they end up stuck. If friends and family go round to the house, their abusers can refuse entry and say that the victim is fine or sleeping when in fact they're in danger. This app does not intend to phone authorities, it is down to the individual support network to organise that as they see fit, this app only intends to reach out to the support network as fast as possible when it is needed. If there is a true emergency and they can call emergency services then they can do so, emergency services are set up to handle this. In the case that the victims only want to notify their support network then they can do so from the app using the panic button.
It might be the case in the future that I build contacts with emergency services for a more involved response but I simply do not have the contacts at this point in time.
I had to use wikipedia to even (sort of) understand what you were selling.
That makes sense now. It's not immediately obvious to a newcomer.
It is very frequently that person trying to help a victim is unable to convince the victim to leave the abuser.
Faced this situation, the next best step is to offer some kind of lifeline that can be triggered when things get bad. It is very important this is inconspicuous because it otherwise is very likely to trigger abusive behavior from their captor and if it is not inconspicuous it has very little chance of being actually used. Abused person that has no privacy is unlikely to call public number that can be tracked to their support person and may face being cut off from any communication.
It is not that important who is on the other side, the same way that is not important who hears shouts of captive person. What is important is there will be some help coming when it is needed the most.
It's a well known technical term for us, but probably not so much for the general public, so this could be easily misinterpreted.
In the case where someone's worried for their life, isn't it exactly the correct severity for the situation?
Wouldn't it be better if the functionality is not just hidden but also includes plausible deniability? Like creating one hidden screen that is accessed when you try to guess the word using just one specific setupable word, and showing another fake / useless screen when every other word is typed ?
Apple are extremely restrictive on how you present your apps, so it will always be obvious what the app is from the listing (which is why I specifically had to use hang man, as the name of the app has to match the general functionality). I couldn't even release a separate app with the same functionality but completely reskinned as they classed it as spam. So I had a problem of only having 1 app and providing functionality to two different sets of users. One set only wants the dead man switch functionality and an initial screen that hides the app is useless to them, and the other set only wants the hidden functionality.
If they were less rigorous in applying their rules then a more secure app could be made and I'm always open to suggestions. This was actually made in conjunction with liasing with a US charity for domestic abuse as it was a feature they specifically asked for.
Also, doesn’t a true dead man’s switch require periodic confirmation? As in, shouldn’t it trigger _unless_ I enter my safe word as a guess every N days?
Edit: I just read the homepage, the linked page didn’t really explain the switch, just the dedicated help button in the menu, so disregard that part.
Apple products are used at a far higher proportion among women (and the vast majority of domestic abuse victims are women) than Android products are and the locked down nature of the platform means that attempts to fight this with innovative apps masquerading as other apps (as the author has indicated that they want to do) breaks their TOS and is banned by the platform.
Feminists need to start sounding the alarm right now and pushing women towards open platforms which give them a chance to fight against their abusers.
More visibility is definitely key, and charities are already stretched so it's not like they have the resources to get this kind of thing done for them. I've been reaching out to various charities to open a channel of communication to let them know that this is available for them.
https://support.apple.com/guide/iphone/make-emergency-calls-...
If it were a dead man’s switch it would trigger if you failed to do so after a certain amount of time.
Also, can you please write somewhere on the website what's your privacy policy? Is everything encrypted? if so, with what?
By it's nature this kind of service will hold very sensitive information.
As with any service you should assume that nothing is encrypted (even though it is) and follow other articles that I've written about how to securely maintain private information when using third party services.
I don't see why anybody would ever use your unsecure service or even pay for it.
Or in a sane world talk to a human being who has the authority to understand that the rule is inappropriate in this case and allow you take the safer option.
How can something as important as this not get escalated inside Apple?
Does need a polish (few bugs - can't delete switches / change reporting time?) and yes, potentially a 'cover story change' (build a simple period tracker for the female audience?)
I know there are a few private and government organisations over here trying to battle this problem, with the use of technology.
This would be a good addition to the options available.
That's the point of the app, isn't it? If you don't use the App for some amount of time, the alarm gets triggered.
In terms of redundancy and failover, barring a total region blackout on the AWS end, the remote service will continue to function forever due to the way I've set up the infrastructure. If I die then the service will simply be handed over to someone else.
Thank you for your concern though.
> uncouplings surged in March as husbands and wives began emerging from weeks of government-mandated lockdowns intended to stop the spread of the novel coronavirus. Incidents of domestic violence also multiplied.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-31/divorces-...
