ddtaylor

Attacking the source of the message instead of the merits.

Ad-HomineLLM

I cancelled my X subscription this month, despite them trying to offer me a lower price. The platform is a mixture of bots and people fighting over how many followers they are getting. I tried to find interesting groups actually making things and sharing with each other, but they don't exist IMO. Most said groups are ran by a few "elites" and then the strategy for anyone else is to do the "engagement bro" garbage - posting for the sake of posting - and overall the platform seems dead I'm the ways that matter to me.

For what it's worth most social media is in a doom spiral right now. It's a mixture of technical issues surged by LLMs and social reasons related to the highly polarizing landscape we are in today. I don't have good solutions and I personally am perfectly fine not being involved in this chapter of the book of the Internet, even if it is the final chapter.

I did a chargeback against OpenAI for something similar and I showed my credit card company the logs with the support bot, as it was my only point of contact for the company.

I think people are getting stuck on the concept of the word doxing here. In anonymous online hacking circles, the idea that you're exposing anyone's OPSEC at all is considered basically doxing. People do it regularly, but it's seen as a clear indication of being an enemy.

Some take a "full disclosure" style and expose all OPSEC failures instantly and transparently, because otherwise people seem to collect OPSEC failures and make it seem to be extortion itself, like saying "hey remember that time you signed off with your real name?" or "I know your clearnet address"

See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47656418

Its still like this. Sadly mobile is the only place I get a "real" subscriptions page, probably because I'm using ReVanced.

I think you're missing the concept here that laws change as a packet travels from one switch to another, not to mention what happens after they go under the ocean.

Are you prepared to be held accountable for breaking the laws of repressed countries that sentence people to death for leaving a religion or insulting authority?

I assume not, but then it's an arbitrary game of whos laws and when. The only logical continuation would be if we had a standard of law worldwide, but that's a separate problem in itself and not anywhere near reality today.

Thanks this looks interesting.

Wait a second... By the view you're espousing right now, doesn't that make this conversation "illegal"? Why aren't we filing DMCA takedowns to HN because the list of the naughty sites is at the top of the page for this very thread?

This seems like turtles all the way down.

Sadly, you're mostly right and the comments section saying to find a pro-bono lawyer is laughable. I think anyone who believes that exists should actually reach out to a real lawyer and see how that conversation goes. I've had those conversations.

Firstly, they can't exist most of the time you can't actually call a lawyer and talk to them - you get their office and their "job" is to gatekeep that lawyer from making any discussions with anyone who isn't represented or paid for a consultation.

Secondly, once you do get into contact with them you'll get a blank stare or phone silence. This is not how most lawyers view pro-bono work. Most of them have a very small quota of pro-bono work to be done and that's it. They get assigned a case by their firm or go and accept a few a year from the state and they're done with it. The idea that an altruistic lawyer exists out there ready to do free and unpaid work is virtually non-existent today.

Seems like a strange way to attempt to police the internet by proxy. The Internet should ignore or route around people attempting to police how nodes connect to each other.

It's exciting to me recently with the increase in copyright abuse and AI blurring the lines that more people are going to be involved with decentralized systems.

There have been multiple different ways to host git repositories over DHT networks such as BitTorrent. Similarly there have been ways to run DHT backed commands for Linux package managers like apt.

These tools often receive little praise because the value of decentralized systems seems low when centralized systems are working to most users without too many issues.

The enshittification is ramping up so quickly recently that more people are reaching out to me on how to setup Linux syatems, home media servers, etc. I genuinely enjoy these technologies, but for the last decade I had more or less just shut up about them to avoid being that guy.

That seems like an argument to go after the actual alleged illegally hosted materials through the proper DMCA takedown request.

The subscriptions page was changed about a month ago. It now shows the videos in the top as "Relevant", which includes a list of videos from the ~12 days that are being suggested to you. After that is a real list of chronologically ordered videos, but videos are not listed twice. This means if the video appears in the first list (as "relevant") then it will not be shown in the second list.

The end result is that the subscriptions page now shows videos "in order", but the order is wrong. My current subscription page shows a video from 14 hours ago, then a video from 9 days ago, then one from 5 days ago, then 6 days ago, and then 1 day ago.

Honestly, I feel like `yt-dlp` does a better job of this with this command:

    yt-dlp --cookies-from-browser chrome --flat-playlist https://www.youtube.com/feed/subscriptions

If anyone has a good solution to YouTube destroying all value of the Subscriptions page I am open ears. Until recently my consumption of YT was basically to go to my subscriptions page and see what new content had been released since I last watched YT.

Just to be clear, the source code exists and none of this matters to most of us. When these idiots get tired of fighting everyone will just be pillaging the corpse and moving forward as FOSS always does.

The market decides. Google and Apple both compete and there are other disruptors. I worked on an education product in 2018 and it would contact third-party services like Khan Academy or Duolingo. And if a child had not earned enough measurable results, they would be unable to access non-educational content.

Not if AI is ultimately a commodity, which it likely is. We don't want or need branded terms for other common features, like networking or files. In the early days of networking, before it was standard, there were attempts to brand things like NetBIOS with IPX and such. I don't want to repeat all of that every time some company wants to establish vendor lockin or branding.

Those are examples of software people choose to use voluntarily. The context here is government removing that choice and forcing you to use something under the conditions they set.

I'm sure there are parental controls for many that go too far or not far enough. A reminder of why the government trying to solve parenting problems is likely to fail like most of their other attempts, such as failing to stop people from growing plants.

Apple has hardware level DRM in some of their products.

It's available on libgen as well.

To anyone salty about that, free advertising cuts both ways. I support their work and it would appear that their goal is to spread the ideas and messages, as it should be with all publishing.

A pointless slippery slope to attempt to stand on that points directly at the Overton Window being drawn around this.

What are the reasons?

NASA had roughly $3B to spend on this specific part of production.

Why isn't NASA hiring a normal production company?

You can't really see anything in that video. The craft is very small on screen.

Why so?

Google has consistently maintained in legal proceedings and terms of service that its technical measures, specifically its "rolling cipher" and signature mechanisms, constitute technological protection measures under the DMCA.

The most prominent public declaration of this stance occurred during the legal battle over youtube-dl (basically the ancesor of yt-dlp). While the RIAA initiated the initial 2020 DMCA takedown, Google's own technical implementation of the "rolling cipher" was the core of the argument.

I have seen tap to pay work before with other ROMs

Come to our fantasy Linux land anytime you want. We circumvent all of the strange things both RIAA, MPAA, Google and many other companies do to attempt to lock information into a box with only one hole they allow you to look through.

Our fantasy land gets better every time your reality gets worse.

Oops we accidentally stole, indexed and resold all your data. Sorry.