Unironically the funniest post he’s had since getting banned from Twitter

Praise be to Allah

I find myself wondering just how complicated TVS could actually be before it’s no longer possible to hijack the display signal that’s fed to the display

Unlike with cars, TVS seem simple enough that a sufficiently motivated novice could modify a cheap TV to circumvent these bullshit features. If they ever started requiring internet connections to start or use these, i think enough people would be bothered by it that there would probably be a secondary market of modified hardware

As with most enshitifications, the question will ultimately be one of complacency of the average consumer.

I dont see how the second cert that goes to the site is useful if it isnt still associated with the first, but I also wouldnt trust the state to abide by an untraceable standard to begin with because identifying individuals by their accounts is in their interest.

I get where the enthusiasm for cryptography is coming from, but I think it’s misplaced.

A state issuing a cert file has to be able to verify that it goes to the intended person. The state would have to know the ID of the person they’re issuing it to, otherwise it wouldn’t function as intended. Similar to blockchain wallets - they are anonymous all the way up to the point of fiat exchange, where most state actors can still end up ID’ing wallet owners.

Even if you try obscuring that information via encryption, it still gets signed by a ‘trusted’ authority at the end of the chain.

Even in theory this is a shit idea.

The problem is that it’s stored outside of your control and accessible without your consent. This system addresses those issues.

Sorry, I just don’t agree with this, either. It isn’t just that it’s a third party, it’s that verification necessarily ties your device to your personal identity at all. No matter how you store the actual identity data, there needs to be an identifier associated with every device/account. I’d be fine if the OS just asked for my age and didn’t verify it with my state-issued ID - but if there’s any cross-checking involved that’s a dealbreaker.

If there were any possibility that a state actor had interest in identifying my personal identity of this account, and there was a record that pointed to my name, SSN, or other unique personal identifiers, i’d be absolutely fucked. There are really good reasons not to want social media accounts tied to real, verifiable identities - even if you think social media should be limited to adults (i’m not on willing to concede this, for what it’s worth).

It doesn’t matter if the data is stored on your local device - if it’s being verified by a state authority at all, that’s a huge problem.

The problem isnt just that the third party can abuse their access to your information, it’s that it is digitally stored and certifiable at all

The most secure data providers in the world have all basically had data breaches by now - including the IRS and US government. There is no party that can guarantee data security, even if they themselves are benevolent.

And for what purpose are we willing to gut privacy online? So it’s marginally more difficult for minors to obtain porn?

GTFO. De-anonymization has always been the goal, not ‘protecting the children’.

Pretty sure someone was able to pose as a PI and get paid access a while ago.

Darknet Diaries had an episode on it

Important to note that it isnt just ads. Any app on your phone with location permission can share it, including some OEM aps qnd bloatware depending on the phone.

If you dont want to be seen, dont take your phone. About the only reasonable way to be sure your data isnt being collected is to not create the data in the first place.

Stay safe out there.

I’m geeking out about this - time to get weirdly into origami

“They lied” implies intent to deceive.

I’m still not arguing against their disqualification, I’m saying people need to lay off the sauce - it’s not hard to imagine how this could have been accidental and not malicious.

We don’t need to torch an effigy every time a studio mentions AI in an interview.

Still, there’s a lot of room there for some grace. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to strip them of the award, but the level of outrage I’m seeing in this thread and elsewhere isn’t proportionate to the offense.

People really need to chill with this.

People keep saying the problem ‘wasnt that they used AI placeholder assets, it’s that they lied on the disclosure’, but boy does that still seem like a reach

When you have dozens of people working on a huge creative project, it would take an almost omniscient creative director to know where every asset in every scene came from with certainty. It isn’t hard to imagine a designer somewhere on the team sneaking an AI asset into a pre-release build and forgetting about it. The fact that it was later disclosed suggests that whoever was applying for the award wasn’t aware of that asset being used and then replaced at the time of submission.

I dont mind having some awards dedicated to genAI-free works, but people really need to stop getting their pitchforks out at every mention, otherwise they risk turning into a lynch mob. This doesnt sound like an intentional omission to me.

Why do people keep sharing this as if it’s an achievement?

Newsom and his tech donors can go get fucked.

I cant wait for the conspiracy theories about this

A simple toggle, secured with a password would do it.

Yea, that’s the thing - I don’t think it would ‘do’ it for legislators. Like you mentioned - it’s not really about protecting children, but also the only way to enforce a law like this would be to log or register devices to specific people or children. This would essentially just shift the point of verification from the individual website to the point of sale of the phone or tablet. Verifying the age is the part that necessitates identification - the only thing a hardware-locked strategy does is centralizes that verification to a governing body instead of individual websites, but it still associates individuals with specific devices.

I get why this might seem preferable, but the problem of online privacy still persists.

I don’t think this is a good idea…

This is even more invasive - it would mean all the traffic and activity in every device would be traceable to a registration. Whereas now they might have a pretty good lock on individual device ids, they’d then have an actual registry of devices and owners to verify it against

Yep, I agree

What about when democrats are the ones splitting the ticket?

Not that I’m aware of, no