You, me, a few other people.
You, me, a few other people.
Ah, yes, I do.
So… What link did you send?
At least this is opt-in, and Firefox still allows for manifest v3 extensions, and, on the whole, isn’t using a engine funded by a billion dollar company that’s doing everything in it’s power to spy on you.
Is he banning them for disagreeing, or for people calling him a pedo over an autistic semantics discussion?
Mind you, I agree that when you hold controversial opinions about certain topics people are likely to discuss, you shouldn’t be a mod. Then again, if you value your sanity and blood pressure, you shouldn’t want to be a mod anyway - it’s a thankless job.
Huh? The screenshot says they think generated pictures are not abusive. Not the it’s not csam.
That’s a very dangerous way of twisting someone’s words, especially on a subject this emotionally charged.
Edit: adding to add that contrary to the title here, they are not talking about Editing pictures to be nudes, but generating them. Don’t get me wrong, I have no interest in seeing either, and the day they’re paying themselves is not doing them any favours. But someone is clearly out for character assassination here.
Nevermind, it was about altering the photos of a 15 year old girl into nudes. And while it technically/physically may not be child abuse, for the victim it might as well be. That’s indefensible - I’m out.
As someone who worked on a couple of video encoding / streaming services, this was an amazingly interesting read. Some personal highlights:
At the risk of committing whataboutism - the same can be said about Facebook, Google, etc. And I don’t say that to marginalise the problem. Quite the contrary - I honestly feel it should be illegal to gather this level of personal detail about people.
That the focus right now is on tiktok is suspect, to say the least, but I guess the upside is that the problem is getting attention now.
Your goldfish lived for 20 years?!
Yeah, because that worked so well with tracking popups.
As The Times told BleepingComputer last week, the attackers used exposed credentials to hack into the newspaper’s GitHub repos.
It explicitly says the credentials were leaked. If you’re really going to insist the word “hack” implies something else, I’m afraid you’re too far on the spectrum for me to continue this conversation. Cya!
For me it just gives an error post0 failed to load
.
Edit: that’s probably my lemmy client trying to approach this blog as though it were a lemmy instance 🤦♂️
Please point out where it states that Microsoft leaked it, rather than the more likely case of NYT leaking their credentials.
[Citation needed]
It’s unused, you can go ahead and kill it.
So… Unless Microsoft directly leaked those credentials, I don’t see how it would be their responsibility.
Truly the brightest timeline.
With these kind of titles, I hope you will, and know you won’t.
I was about to mention this example. It’s everything you love about mythbusters (doing crazy science experiments), without everything you hate about mythbusters and what made me stop watching. No more constant hopping over between the different myths per episode, or tons of recaps.
Just myths, one at a time, no bullshit.