I don't know why an OS or piece of software would look up an address without going to it. However, there's no reason to speculate about why. I just want to know whether it connected to those addresses or not, and the article/video made it impossible for me to know that definitively. The author(s) omitted presenting actual evidence and for some reason showed something tangential. I don't need to justify my questioning of that unusual presentational choice.
I'm not going to make assumptions about "the software MUST have connected because the domain name was looked up". It's not my job to connect the dots: it's the job of the person making the assertion to actually substantiate the assertion, otherwise their assertion will be ignored by people like me who actually expect such substantiation.
No, I have no information that the author is lying, and I didn't even begin to suggest as such. I have pointed out the absence of substantiation, which is an observation of fact.
The truth is that we in the industry already know exactly what is happening and why. Confirmed over and over and over. If you want to throw away that knowledge away because he didn't cross the t's for you, more power to you.
Your condescending attitude is unnecessary and unwarranted, and your messages have done nothing to increase my awareness of actual evidence of privacy violation. My stance of expecting assertions to include substantiating evidence is completely reasonable, and is a basic premise of accepting assertions as fact. The link you added - what's the purpose of that? It's some random user's unsubstantiated assertion. Was it supposed to be a joke, or... ?
btw RE: "everyone in the industry knows": https://www.logicalfallacies.org/argumentum-ad-populum.html I don't care if "everyone knows", if someone makes an extraordinary claim, my response is always "prove it". I don't believe things just because other people do.
Was a bit embattled due to the numerous downvotes for supporting the post, likely due to shills.
If you honestly want to learn about the subject I'd start with the PBS Frontline documentary called "The United States of Secrets."
Next, learn about "surveillance capitalism." The Facebook and Social Dilemma, on Netflix are eye-openers.
Another milestone was Apple giving their OS away for free. Combined with Linux always being free and popular on servers, that made expensive Windows a much harder sell. There's a big cost to develop a modern OS, so there's a great incentive to "monetize" away that cost. In practice that means advertising and surveillance which is exactly what you are seeing here.
This is a story developing for over ten years. That a few pieces of the thousand piece puzzle are not delivered on a silver-platter is immaterial to the discussion.
I'm not going to make assumptions about "the software MUST have connected because the domain name was looked up". It's not my job to connect the dots: it's the job of the person making the assertion to actually substantiate the assertion, otherwise their assertion will be ignored by people like me who actually expect such substantiation.
No, I have no information that the author is lying, and I didn't even begin to suggest as such. I have pointed out the absence of substantiation, which is an observation of fact.