grumio

This is great. This is the new Yuletide log channel.

Maybe something that's aided by an AI that generates English texts(a little similar to your iPhone auto-suggest, but more advanced) so that the sentences are valid and coherent. The recipient would need to know some sort of key/"seed" for the AI, that you'd give them in another channel. I bet something like that would be possible, but the ciphertext would be much larger than the plaintext. Still a fun idea.

Yeah idk if it'd be my first conclusion. But I think that's the propaganda line of reasoning. No proof that it's propaganda, but there is a sliver of plausibility.

Edit: Just because the public announcement may be construed as propaganda, it doesn't mean that the charges were necessarily wholly made-up.

The case for it being propaganda goes something like this: Barr's DoJ is making this charge publicly released so that the US can appear to be "tough on Russia." Despite Trump failing to condemn Navalny's Novichok poisoning or taking action regarding the intel on Russian blood-bounties on US soldiers. This would follow the pattern of other pro-Trump (painting him as a victim, or strong-man where convenient) politicized DoJ announcements such as 9 ballots being found in the trash, including noting that 7 of them were cast for Trump.

https://www.axios.com/trump-russia-bounties-taliban-putin-ca... https://www.axios.com/trump-alexei-navalny-poisoning-russia-... https://www.justice.gov/usao-mdpa/pr/revised-statement-us-at...

You're right, science is proven wrong time and time again. We used to think Newtonian physics was the bees' knees. Man, they sure look like fools now that we know Einsteinian physics is more accurate.

Science is a LIAR sometimes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFPtjXFfczM

Small startups don't deserve this. With EARNIT, you couldn't make a Twitter or Reddit or thingiverse or anything with a chatroom unless you already have the resources to moderate all user generated content, use committee-approved broken encryption and whatever else they force on them.

> Great power should require great responsibility

This doesn't just hurt the giants.

Time for them to cash-in on the anti-big-tech rhetoric wave they've been riding since the anti-trust hearings.

Also, are there other laws that are phrased like this? That you have to "earn" a right that you already have? They should just right-out say they are forcing the choice of having rights stripped or following the laws of a newly-created lawmaking body(committee).

Could this new body force them to use a backdoored encryption, or even a particular NSA-made software? What a farce.

Imagine when people who don't know any better start plugging this into facial-recognition cameras, and arrest based on the chaining of two flawed/imperfect algorithms. Not if, but when.

What's the incentive to reduce false arrests? Are the arrestors' jobs at stake? Is their wallet at stake?

Why put in the extra effort if there are no consequences for being wrong?

Most of the time it seems the worst-case scenario for the perpetrator of the false arrest is being relegated to desk-duty or a paid suspension. If there's a settlement it's the tax-payers that foot the bill. Until that changes, there's basically no reason for them to make the effort to reduce false arrests. This isn't a problem that will be solved with recognition algorithms getting a few percentage points more accurate every year. It will require actual reform.

The whole point is that the source of randomness is coming from rolling physical dice, instead of a potentially flawed (pseudo)random number generator.

The purpose is to demonize big tech. It's the new "tough on crime." Of course there's a lot to criticize, but if criticizing and making change were the real goals, the hearing would look very different. They might have done more research and make specific demands.

edit/P.S.: I don't mean to sound sorry for big tech. They're not some poor unsuspecting victims. I'm just worried that they'll try to use this hearing, especially the vague "anti-conservative bias" questions, in order to trick people into supporting EARN IT.

This act seems like it's 1% about holding big tech accountable or whatever, and 99% about stoking anti-big-tech rhetoric that the authoritarians in congress will try to harness into support for EARN IT and other surveillance bills.

Tech giants aren't angels, and ideally should reduce some of their anti-competition practices, but I don't think that's what this is really about.

That's good practice. Sadly these kinds of scams already happen without the effort of synthetic voices. Scammers call an older person and say "Hey Grandma, it's me your grandson. I need $500 for bail right away!" With the help of Facebook they can learn names and details to sound more convincing.

>BLM protestors making people kneel

Source? Any videos of BLM protestors forcing people to kneel?

The Rule of Law seems optional to the kidnappers that won't identify themselves too.

What's important? That the Rule of Law is kept, or that the "right people" break the law?

Flynn told FBI he didn't discuss specific sanctions in phone calls to a specific person. He did. Primary source, the phone transcripts, available for all to read: https://www.grassley.senate.gov/sites/default/files/2020-05-...

What am I missing?

some animals are more equal than others

It's their SOP. See: eternal blue. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/EternalBlue

Totally. They're making almost criminally high margins while they wait for the law to catch up. The story of several disruptive startups.

Couldn't the scooter companies negotiate with businesses and get permission? Maybe pay businesses to install docking stations. The scooters get advertising when people see the station. The restaurant or hotel gets advertisment on the scooter app as a designated docking station. And the business can tow unwelcome scooters not in the dock. Just like they are allowed to tow cars.

Seems like the scooter startups think they're special and permits and regulations don't apply to them.

"parallel reconstruction" is illegal but still alive and well. The Fed intelligence doesn't care about the law too much.

I hope by "password fields are encrypted" you mean that only hashes are stored.

This far: http://marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm

Good short story on surveillance & algorithms micromanaging low wage workers.

I like how this exact attack is used in the Splinter Cell games.

FTA: "The investigation revealed that PHILLIPS engaged another individual, who has since become a cooperating defendant (“CD-1”), to commit a murder of an identified victim (“Victim-1”)"

As I read it, the potential hitman became a defendant after Phillips attempted to hire him. The potential hitman wasn't LE or on LE's side before that.

The website for this kind of legislation: http://humantraffickingpreventionact.com

According to claims that pornography consumption leads to prostitution and human trafficking.

Compares movie theaters and magazine stands to computers.

Would require pre-installed filters on devices by manufacturers that need to be kept up-to-date.

Would require official identification and registry to remove filter.

Cites already existing laws to call for a new law that is supposed to strengthen them.

I really wonder who they've consulted with on feasibility.

Seems similar to the ISP filters in the UK.

But on individuals' devices! Ridiculous.

But I'm mostly upset that these legislators feel they need to shield our eyes from obscenity and disrespect our autonomy.

Sorry if this has already been posted, maybe I didn't perform a thorough enough search of past HN posts. Posting because I haven't seen much discussion of this online.

They may as well ban all files of random data of unknown origin. If it passes diehard tests with flying colors, confiscate it and arrest all known possessors of it.

splix.io

More like making a locksmith create a tool that could alter a pick-proof lock and turn it into a pickable lock, and give that tool to the gov't. But as others here have said, there are some key differences between the physical and digital worlds, so there are complications afterwards.

And one more reason: deterrence. Supposedly, would-be criminals are deterred by seeing others get jail time. Depending on the crime, that purpose is rarely accomplished as well.