Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)G

General_Effort

@ General_Effort @lemmy.world

Posts
94
Comments
1029
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • Denmark: Union website deindexed by Google in the firm’s latest search experiment

    Jump

  • A few years ago, the EU expanded copyright so that "information service providers" have to get consent to use news articles in any way. So google has obtained licenses but the publishers want more money. Google says it's not worth it. Given how notoriously delusional copyright owners are, I believe google.

  • Mastodon Now Sends Referer Headers! Hurrah!

    Jump

  • Turning that on is probably a GDPR violation for those in Europe.

    ETA: Don't shoot the messenger. I won't be suing.

  • Just curious but are we heading towards an "eat the rich" society?

    Jump

  • I doubt it. There's a good chance that we will see copycat killers. That's a well known phenomenon, but it is not a change in society.

    High-profile events can catalyze changes. Violence has been committed. A person died. That creates a sense of urgency. Americans have discovered that there is a broad consensus that something ought to be done about health care. We'll see.

    But I do not see any appetite for a societal change. Americans look at individuals, not at systemic factors. The USA has, by far, the highest incarceration rate in the world. It costs the taxpayer a lot of money to feed and house all those people, not to mention that the rest of society misses out on all the productive labor they could do. The US likes to punish individuals for perceived wrong-doing, but it does not look at systemic factors.

    US society now wants more bad guy CEOs punished. That's not a change and it will not lead to a change. People aren't even thinking about how the law could be changed to punish these bad guys, or what they personally could do alone or by collective action. They are waiting for heroes.

    Americans want V (for Vendetta) to save them while they watch the show. Many think that Elon Musk is Ironman. That's part of the malaise.

    People want individuals to take care of things and so individuals need the power to do so. Well, billionaires are people who have been given the power to take care of business (excuse the pun). And if they don't do it right, it's because they are greedy or have some other individual flaw.

  • Landlords Are Using AI to Raise Rents—and Cities Are Starting to Push Back

    Jump

  • No. Maybe that's just clickbait, or maybe the writers here prefer AI to be the target of the outrage. The complaint has very little to do with AI.

  • Moderators Across Social Media Struggle to Contain Celebrations of UnitedHealthcare CEO’s Assassination

    Jump

  • The people operating the platform may be fined if they don't moderate according to their local law.

    I've seen people here often cheer for the EU standing up to Big Tech. Well, this, too, is EU regulations.

  • Moderators Across Social Media Struggle to Contain Celebrations of UnitedHealthcare CEO’s Assassination

    Jump

  • An armed society is a polite society. I've never believed that. I still don't. There doesn't seem to be much of a connection between gun ownership and access to health care.

  • Moderators Across Social Media Struggle to Contain Celebrations of UnitedHealthcare CEO’s Assassination

    Jump

  • Moderators Across Social Media Struggle to Contain Celebrations of UnitedHealthcare CEO’s Assassination

    Jump

  • I don't think it has much to do with ethics in the usual sense. It's all about tribal allegiance. Facebook and the like are the enemy. Anything that seems to bother the enemy is cheered. There is no thought that laws apply generally. It reminds me of that old internet meme about conservatism. There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

    I think you could make a serious argument that the CEO killing was self-defense. But it's not going to really change anything. Maybe the successor is less ruthless but they will be making decisions in the same social context; facing the same incentives and disincentives.

  • Moderators Across Social Media Struggle to Contain Celebrations of UnitedHealthcare CEO’s Assassination

    Jump

  • .world is in the EU. The same laws that apply to inciting hate or violence against "The Jews" or "The Blacks" also apply to "The CEOs". And the same laws that apply to Facebook also apply to lemmy.

  • Assassination is a Leaky Abstraction

    Jump

  • if statement == false

    Jump

  • In normal parlance, "if and only if" rules out that something could also happen as a result of other circumstances. EG, if you fall out of a plane, you will lose your glasses. But there are other conditions that would lead to the same result.

    In code, the alternative would be to have a different if statement that executes identical code. Or cough you could use a jump instruction to execute literally the same code.

  • New website shows you how much Google AI can learn from your photos

    Jump

  • They say they don't. Would be very bad publicity if they did, and possibly breach of contract or other legal trouble.

  • Korea arrests CEO for adding DDoS feature to satellite receivers

    Jump

  • Satellite receiver usually means a thingy for receiving satellite TV. Receiver means that it only receives signals but cannot transmit any.

    I assume that these are internet enabled. Maybe just for updates, or maybe to also do streaming. So, I take it to mean that they do the normal internet DDOS thing on the side, in a way that has nothing to do with satellites.

  • New website shows you how much Google AI can learn from your photos

    Jump

  • Yeah. The descriptions are neat but not disconcerting. The coordinates would be scary but seem to come from the metadata. Annoying viral marketing.

  • How could digitial age verification be possibly implemented with privacy in mind?

    Jump

  • It's not necessary to expose the identities of the users. The age confirmation could happen via a password, PIN, or even a physical USB dongle. Tying such methods to a particular identity adds nothing to the age verification.

    If that is not enough, then one would need a permanent, live webcam feed of the user. It could be monitored by AI, and/or police officers could make random checks.

    Granted, one would have to make sure that not everyone behind the same router can use age-restricted services; eg with a VPN. That would let them assign connections to individual, anonymous adults. But I'd guess you could do that anyway with some confidence by analyzing usage patterns. Besides, information on who is in a home can also be found in other places such as social media or maybe company websites. So I do not think this is much new information.

    But thinking about it, one could compartmentalize this.

    The ISP only allows connections to whitelisted servers, including 1 or more government approved VPNs. The ISP refuses connection to these VPNs without age confirmation. The VPN provider does not need to be told the identity of the customer. There needs to be no persistence across sessions. The ISP need not know what sites are visited via VPN. While the VPN provider need not know about sites visited without.

    If you do it that way, the ISP ends up knowing less than before.

    Since both ISP and VPN servers and offices would be physically located in the country, one would have no problem enforcing prohibitions on data sharing, if desired by lawmakers.

    Anyway, this is the only realistic approach in the whole thread. Everything else assumes that Australian law will be followed globally. And then the ISP still has all that usage data. Why not just use a blockchain...

  • How could digitial age verification be possibly implemented with privacy in mind?

    Jump

  • I'd lean on the ISPs. Your ISP knows what sites you visit, and they have your location and payment information. They can just insert some verification page when a classified IP is contacted. This gives them hardly any information beyond what they already have. And since they are mainly located in Australia, it is easy to enforce laws on them.

    You have to lean on ISPs anyway because it is quite ridiculous to assume that the entire global internet will implement Australian laws. Does anyone believe that their Lemmy instance will implement some AI face scan or cryptography scheme?

    You would have to block servers that do not comply with the law anyway. The effective solution would be a whitelist of services that have been vetted. In practice, I think we'll see the digital equivalent of ok boomer.

    If a whitelist seems extreme, then one should have another look at the problem. The point is to make sure that information is only accessed by citizens with official authorization. There is no technological difference between the infrastructure needed to enforce this (or copyrights) and some totalitarian hellscape.

  • Why are there so many new AI-powered tools that scrape websites?

    Jump

  • If that's what you want, you should join Facebook.

    The fundamental thing to understand is that the internet - and really all information processing - is about copying. There is no such thing as "looking" at a profile or a post. The text and image data is downloaded to your device. You end up with multiple copies on your device.

    Sending information out, but blocking people from storing it, is fundamentally a contradiction in terms.

    Bsky - like Lemmy - made the choice to make the data widely available. It is available via API and does not need to be scraped. The alternative is to do it like Reddit or even Facebook or Discord. But they can't stop scraping, either. They can make it slower and more laborious but not stop it. Services like Facebook protect the data as best as they can to "protect your privacy". In reality, it's about making it hard for you to leave the platform or anyone else to benefit from your data. Either way, you can trust Zuck to protect your data as if it was his own. Because it is.

  • Next year we may see copyright value having doubled within a decade. Make no mistake: it’s boom time.

    Jump

  • Well, this post got downvoted big-time, and the other one upvoted. Doesn't really fit the energy explanation.

    There's an obvious difference between this post, the OpenAI lawsuit post, and a lot of other popular copyright posts. This one is about how copyright owners are getting richer. The popular posts are about how the owners are being stolen from and exploited by tech companies like OpenAI or Spotify. Aww. Poor souls need more money. Boom times gotta boom.

  • Next year we may see copyright value having doubled within a decade. Make no mistake: it’s boom time.

    Jump

  • Major parts are about the streaming industry.