Melody

joined 1 year ago
[–] Melody@lemmy.one 2 points 1 month ago (3 children)

The filtration capabilities available to most users is pretty robust; depending on what you use to interact with the Fediverse. I thinik it would be possible to filter out problematic bots, users and even whole domain sources with the right kind of software.

[–] Melody@lemmy.one -2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Honestly I think the rate should've dropped by 2 or 3 whole percentage points (so like 200 or 300 basis).

The current rates are OBSCENELY HIGH and have not halted inflation even if they have attenuated it to some extent.

The Fed likely knew this damage would occur from this kind of tampering and only now are they acting to curb it.

[–] Melody@lemmy.one 10 points 1 month ago (6 children)

I'm going to be bold enough to say we don't have as wide of an AI/LLM issue on the Fediverse as the other platforms will have.

I'm certain that if someone did collect data from the Fediverse; it would become a hot topic and it might not be enough data anyways as the Fediverse is not mainstream enough normally. So the data and language collected here might skew in a few imaginable ways that one might find undesirable for a general model of word frequencies.

Also the fact that people might not appreciate that data being collected. Let's be real. It's too soon for such a project to begin. The AI TREND MUST DIE as it currently lives and it's corpse must be rotted away completely. Now, in internet time that may not be all that long...a few to several years...the memory of the internet can be short-lived at times. It must, however, fade from the public conscience into some obscurity first.

Once the technology no longer lies in greedy hands again; new development can begin anew.

[–] Melody@lemmy.one 47 points 2 months ago (5 children)

People need to stand firm against the needless RTOs and demands to be present in a workplace where your work consists largely of things you can do safely from the privacy of your own home.

Without more mass resignations when companies start to roll out RTOs like this; they will never learn. If you work at such a company; start looking for another job, even if you are willing to work in the office a few days a week. Punish them harshly for enforcing RTOs.

[–] Melody@lemmy.one 5 points 2 months ago

It occurs to me that adding a visual watermark might actually serve to obscure a visual watermarking scheme that is otherwise invisible by providing data that scrambles or breaks the watermark decoder itself.

Audio watermarks can be distorted in any number of ways; and it could be that some of the wildly poor audio quality in most cam-rips is probably the only way you can defeat the watermark; by using a LQ microphone and encoding the audio to a very limited bitrate and then re-upsampling; to defeat any subtle alterations a digital watermark might make to the audio waveform.

[–] Melody@lemmy.one 7 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Watermarks are only an issue in-as-much as it is used to trace down which copy was leaked.

With modern digital projection systems; you don't get a reel of film; you get a briefcase of [SS/HD]Ds containing the raw, encrypted, footage. The digital projection system will decrypt using provided keys. There's no output except the standard ones for the theatre projectors and sound systems...so capturing the output is difficult.

If you do intercept the signal; the projection system might detect it; and refuse playback or wipe the decryption keys. Watermarking is also a danger; since your theater can get identified as the leak source and sued.

[–] Melody@lemmy.one 8 points 2 months ago

Now we wait for someone to build an absolutely wonderful chat app on top of this wonderful bit of PoC code...

I genuinely hope someone does. Imagine what this could do if this was routed over Tor using Private Services.

Run this over that; and you'd have a bullet-proof text chat. Wrap a nice GUI client around all of that and you have a proper secure, anonymous messenger with no problems. With a little more build-out; you could even implement the Matrix protocol over this wire-line and basically have full inter-federation and moderation over a secure wire protocol; allowing for complete privacy and client integration.

TL;DR: Matrix over PQChat over Tor. Think about it. A Post-Quantum Dark-Matrix web.

[–] Melody@lemmy.one 5 points 2 months ago

Can it? Maybe. It's not impossible; but it isn't practical and most ISPs limit their shenanigans to grabbing your unencrypted DNS requests.

Will it? Probably no; aside from the previously mentioned DNS redirections; they're not interested in most people's packets, only in how many they deliver.

Should you care? I won't tell you not to take precaution, but I do urge you to consider your threat model carefully and consider the tradeoffs. When Security & Privacy goes up, Convenience and Functionality WILL go down. Balance your needs. Don't put yourself in a state of Privacy fatigue.

Are there easy fixes? Maybe. I think a VPN or using Tor would solve your concerns here anyways; it's not required that your modem be running OSS that you can control. If you can achieve it; that's still good for you; but it's not something to be sweating if your modem isn't capable and your invasive ISP is the only effective option.

[–] Melody@lemmy.one 22 points 2 months ago

In general I think using AI imagery, and catfishing in general, is basically entrapment. In most civilized countries; that's illegal for police to do.

Now if they begin to actually trade in actually legitimate forbidden materials...sure; by all means arrest for that charge alone. That wouldn't be unjustified. But provoking someone who might then turn around and harm a real child, seems wrong.

[–] Melody@lemmy.one 1 points 2 months ago

As I stated before; 5% is not significant enough. It won't ensure the victory; it might barely even turn the tide. Depends on how Trump does.

In some states; that's even within a margin of error, and might be close enough to cause certain states to enter run-offs...because we know the GOP is a bunch of sore losers.

[–] Melody@lemmy.one 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I'm not accounting for State laws; which may in fact be stricter. I'm talking about Federal Laws which might not explicitly forbid such things; so long as they're done in an actually safe manner by professionals.

But, as I said before, if the DEA believes it has the power to stop that none-the-less; that's what they will do, without respect to if the law is actually legally unclear or borderline. Unfortunately many pharmaceutical places don't care to invite the wrath of the DEA; even if what they're doing could be considered permissible; so long as they do not synthesize an exact drug that the Feds specifically name as a controlled substance.

Again; IANAL either. But I do think there's a lot of room for small compounding pharmacies to synthesize various drugs to meet a patient's needs quickly while waiting for proper shipments to arrive. There's lots of compounds that are life-sustaining that do not fall under the DEA banner of authority.

view more: ‹ prev next ›