avidruntime

How does firefly bypass a ban from X for violating their no 3rd party app policies?

Reminder that while the election for the next congress is next week, the next congress is seated in January. The political agendas from that new congress will likely materialize after the results of the election as campaign promises conform to the political realities of who has a majority, and by what margin.

I'm in the same boat. Not using reddit has resulted in time savings, but it comes also at a cost of losing a window into the world of people & their thoughts that I really valued. I have not yet found any place that acts as a front page of the internet, anywhere. I wonder if its even possible to get back to that in today's post-organic internet era, given the widely understood second order effects of using a platform as an instrument for dissemination of ideas/brands vs. organic content, and the suspicions that that awareness entails.

Even now, there are people running SMM account networks that simply take top or trending content on one platform, reformat it with AI, and post it in the same conversation on a separate platform-- effectively recreating the partial utility of a front page of the internet but only at the cost of inserting themselves as middle men who over time accrue gatekeeping power that is completely opaque from the outside. Not a new idea. Arguably an inevitable idea. It still sucks, though.

What an awesome resource, really appreciate you sharing this.

I wonder if the redirect target is region based, because my redirect took me to the fake Github page. I'm in the US. A fake RT article rhymes with the well established doppelganger propaganda campaign, which could rationalize why it would be region based. The irony of the doppelganger campaign being a Russian state-sponsored campaign is not lost on me.

100%. My POV is really just "if I could fold my MBP into a tablet without any compromise, and that feature costed an extra couple hundred more than an equally specced non-touch MBP, I probably would go for it and barely use it"

Now that the evidence is shared and reproducible, I agree with you. This should be an embarrassing moment for the r/seattle mods, but I somewhat doubt it will be. Glad a more level headed conversation found its way to HN.

I'm not the target for this particular product either and you and I use our MBPs in pretty much identical ways. I will say though, if the laptop's hinge allowed reverse clamshell like the Yoga, then I would consider the premium for a feature I would rarely use. I like the idea of a tablet, but any time I'm seated with one, I'm either doing something I'd do on my phone or doing something that I'd rather be doing on my computer running a desktop OS.

Unlike you I don't see myself switching to the Studio or Mini. My MBP has been extremely performant and its capability of on the go work makes it the perfect product IMO!

Reproduced on my end too.

I see that now too!

I disagree with your characterization of that the mods don't know what's going on.

The moderators seem to be making it quite clear: they do know what is going on and the onus is not on them to prove it, only to notify actions have been taken in response. https://www.reddit.com/r/Seattle/comments/1xhf6qp/archivetod...

This attitude is extended when someone else asks a question about evidence, instead of replying to the question, the moderator sarcastically calls out the commentor for posting in the sub for the first time: https://www.reddit.com/r/Seattle/comments/1xhf6qp/archivetod...

The moderator conflates questions about evidence and requests for more details as "making demands" https://www.reddit.com/r/Seattle/comments/1xhf6qp/archivetod...

Its unusual and arguably suspicious because this attitude is antithetical to the stated point of the thread: To make a PSA to the community. They've also limited the comment section to only flaired users, which seems quite unusual given that this thread is ground-zero for a newsworthy claim.

And about 30 minutes ago, they switched the reddit post to flaired user only for comments.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Seattle/comments/1xhf6qp/archivetod...

Not sure if this post even qualifies to be on hacker news...its all rumors and any attempt to distill the incident to its facts is met with pushback.

Perhaps, but it could also just be "take our word for it" devolving into more "take our extended word for it". Being prepared to make an alarming enough claim that it sparks discussion outside of the sub but being unwilling to provide evidence remains suspicious.

That suspicion becomes more grounded when the conversation with the subreddits mod regarding why the claim was made without a willingness to provide evidence looks like this:

>If you're going to make an allegation like this, it's necessary to be specific. Specifically, what is the malware, and what is the evidence that it was "injected"? This is "consult a security researcher" and "speak to the media" territory, not "mod announcement" territory.

>>No it's not. These archive sites are a legal gray area anyway. We don't have to consult anyone to decide not to allow the links. No we are not talking to the media, we're not providing research, or a proof. I'm not calling the mayor. We are reddit mods . This is purely about community management.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Seattle/comments/1xhf6qp/archivetod...

Is it a power trip stemming from a technical misunderstanding (archive.today exploited to deliver malware =/= archive.today attempting to deliver malware) or is it something else? In any case, reading the comments on reddit, seems like the mods are going out of their way to appeal to hysterics.

Unbelievable that the comment asking for evidence sits at -24 upvotes in that thread as of now. https://www.reddit.com/r/Seattle/comments/1xhf6qp/archivetod...

Not sure what to believe here. Wouldn't it be possible to create a site that has some js embedded that is able to be aware of archive's process so that the archived page renders a different page than the original? Could that secondary page be what is trying to deliver the malware, using archive as an unwitting laundry? That matches the MO of malware delivery via other services, no? I'm baffled as to why the mods don't provide any details whatsoever. There are more links to the controversy between the blogger who sought archive's webmasters identity than details of this incident. The mods in this subreddit are doubling down on not sharing details under the guise of "not our job to be infosec". Perhaps a write up is in due time but at the moment this feels like a sketchy extension of the aforementioned drama

Edit: Another r/seattle moderator (not the OP of the original post) has posted their technical writeup of the malware, which is detailed and definitely more in line with what we'd expect with this kind of PSA. While I stand by all criticisms of the OP moderator and their initial handling of the disclosure, you can find the details of the incident in this excellent write up: https://www.reddit.com/r/Seattle/comments/1xhf6qp/archivetod...

I feel like there's been a shift. Elon used to have god like status, but as he spent that social capital on objectionable behavior, it seems the shift has been towards a general dismissal and disdain for people who dislike Elon, which gets conflated into a similar thought terminating argument like "Trump derangement syndrome"

Crazy how the pieces have fallen.

Would love a feature where selecting a window automatically resizes it to the aspect ratio of the iPhone, vertical or landscape, so it can be full screened losslessly on the iPhone.

HN commenters always seem to forget the paradox of intolerance

> President of the Danish Council for Digital Security, Henning Mortensen, does not rule out that the incident may have to do with a hybrid war. In recent weeks, Danish services have warned of possible cyber attacks from Russia and raised the degree of threat to "high."

https://www.rmf24.pl/fakty/swiat/news-wojna-hybrydowa-cybera...

All by design

Often when people describe SI or similar, there is a frame often taken which describes a machine so smart and capable that it becomes uncontrollable. The hypothetical is easy to understand but it requires too many assumptions and an allergy to nuance/complexity to be believable for me.

The more realistic outcome, and in my opinion the more scary argument to not proceed without guardrails is that SI is achievable and is built without its owners and operators losing control: the worlds most powerful, privately owned super weapon that operates as an infinitely capable forgery within the Internet, a plane that we all share and depend on despite its opaque downsides with respect to an inability to verify authenticity.

We didn't need AI for FTC astroturfing to influence regulations back in the net neutrality days. We didn't need AI to disrupt meat space by creating and scheduling a protest and counter protest across the street from one another. We didn't need AI to mold public opinion, even in times when that new form was more distant from the truth.

What made these influence ops difficult to conduct safely (read: without being caught) is what made them rare (relative to today): they are plays of big risk for big reward. But over time social media commoditized it, and in doing that made it easier to do and more centralized, the most glaring example being TikTok and the bipartisan effort to ban it.

Now, buying US phone numbers from startups that run racks of "phones", buying swarms of pre-warmed social media accounts, and other unscrupulous methods of masking inauthentic behavior has become an accepted organ of the VC space. The industries cultural vibe of "fuck you, you can't stop the future" turns criticisms into marketing.

While we get placated with fears of nuclear or AI induced disaster and stories about machines that may now be alive, the psychosis is taking hold which has shifted the conversation away from examining what is happening from the perspective of accountability to a perspective akin to watching a chemical reaction take place.

The noise has created a permission structure to behave in ways that are otherwise unjustifiable. And baked in are the roots for excuses to be made when the inevitable realizations down the line.

In the mean time, we are supposed to be having this public discourse about what is happening and what should happen next. I trust that these AI companies see using their super weapon today, here and now, in order to pave the way to a more secure future down the line.

Sorry that I used your post to soapbox. I agree, the goal is flawed indeed.

What do you get out of making comments like this?

> In the past, but today fewer people are getting paid less this way.

There has never been more content creators making a living off their content than there is today. Look no further than these enormous platforms with ad rev sharing options for contributors producing UGC.

> Would you rather resurrect IP law, or find some new way to pay creators, then finish killing it?

Uploading content online and getting a cut of ad revenue fits this criteria, no?

The idea that we would scrap IP law and rewrite it from scratch is the very definition of tossing the baby out with the bathwater, IMO.

They don't think its okay, as evidenced by this submission predictably being flagged. Also predictably, they will not be here to defend or explain, either.

I get your point but its hard not to look past the fact that only 1 of the 4 mentioned mediums have real time, user-personalized, opaque algorithmic endless scrolling, and a disproportionately higher rate of addiction.

Personally I think the hanlon's razor approach is an intellectually lazy thought terminating cliche that provides cover to people/groups who do act with malice.

A US administration sympathetic to Russia stands to benefit from higher oil prices.

The "Remind white people of what happened 300 years ago" in question is an explainer on how a 19th century Super El Nino wiped out over 3% of the world's population, mostly in Asia, despite the fact that these regions had experienced famines and droughts at numerous points in their prior history. The video then asks the question, "Why was this so much more deadly?"

The explanation posits that this was only possible due to the multiplier of the rapidly expanding British empire. It is not posited as British/white people are bad, it is posited as society, politics and trade creating a multiplier effect. The whole point of this section in the video is to setup the final chapter of the video, asking the question, "Could this happen again?", which feels like a valid question given that society, politics, and trade have exponentially evolved since the 19th century.

This section of the video is portrayed so agnostically that I felt compelled to reply to your vague criticism.

Here is the video linked to the timestamp of the aforementioned section, which is only around 2 minutes long, so others can pass their own judgement: https://youtu.be/69o-8Mtd3Kc&t=330

Not sure how you can be here for the science if you're not willing to be here for the history.

>My carrier does not allow transferring eSIMs between phones

That is insane.

There's also just a growing number of the simple contrarian perspective mixed with the growing "anything new is bad" cultural lens.