Coopr8

Who can lead us to cooperative ownership of datacenter and internet hard infrastructure? Who will organize the collective digital workforce? Who will assemble the fund?

I have been tempted to try IPL hair removal myself

today I learned there are a bunch of movies named Joy Ride

(the best) Local LLMs are FOSS though, if bias is introduced it can be detected and the user base can shift away to another version, unlike centralized cloud LLMs that are private silos.

I also don’t think LLMs of any kind will fully replace search engines, but I do think they will be one of a suite of ML tools that will enable running efficient local (or distributed) indexing and search of the web.

You’re joking right? “making up answers” in the case of search results just means a dead link. If you get a good link 99% of the time and don’t have to use an enshitified service, that’s good enough for 99% of people. Try again is the worst case scenario.

Also, you know what would make this all even worse? Laws requiring that people prove their identity in order to consume content or pull videos… just like age verification laws now being passed in several countries. What a coincidence.

Not to mention that the scraped indexes can and should be shared. Unfortunately what OP is seeing may be a move to thwart this type of brute force scraping, and might resolve as dynamically assigned domain addresses, where the URL of a set object is temporarily assigned and streamed only to a single or group of IP addresses that request it within a given timeframe before being rotated out until found in search again and then reassigned a new URL, etc. This is a frankly stupid use of resources, but can effectively be used to prevent crowdsourced indexes from proliferating, and to punish IPs or even MAC addresses or browser fingerprints associated with downloading and reuploading videos which almost certainly have stegnographic fingerprinting embedded that associate with who the video was served up to at the time it was downloaded.

Windat

If only I were the king of the world!

I think what you are arguing for is hardcoding requitement for signatures with an “age appropriateness” ranking into the OS. How does this change the current situation where adult sites and apps are legally required to have an age verification popup/warning? Whether signature based or graphically based, what is at issue here is age verification which means referring to some “repository of truth” outside the will of the user. The problem is that the effect of this is to link government ID directly to web traffick, as to truly verify age requires verifying identity meaning abolishing anonymity on the web and enabling complete tracking of dissent.

I could see a version of what you are describing akin to the way physical cryptographic keys are used to manage DRM on high end enterprise software, where identity/age verification would need to be done by the hardware vendor and not the software/site, the problem with that however is the aftermarket and multiple-user devices. You could say that the “age key” would be a hardware device sold to adults using physical ID akin to spirits or tobacco, something like a SIM Card but preferably with NFC rather than having to be installed in the device. “Adult Access” would then be enabled on sign-in by scanning the “age key”, enabling onboard software to serve software and sites that don’t have an “all ages signature”.

Honestly as I write this, it isn’t the worst solution, the main thing would be keeping the Age Key as an interchangeable, replaceable device that only interacts with the OS and isn’t referenced by other software, so it doesnt just become another Digital ID proxie.

Nice, shame the assistant isn’t on Windows.

Don’t go giving them ideas. That way leads to Digital ID at birth, which should be avoided at all costs.

It’s wild to me that Soulseek persists despite being entirely mediated by a single central server. I would have thought it would have gotten the takedown long ago.

Also the fact that it doesn’t swarm, only does one to one peer sharing is kind of odd to me, but I guess it actually makes some sense in that it constrains the network to being more optimal for smaller files like music and so keeps video off of the platform for the most part.

Worth noting that the Soulseek Wikipedia page lists a bunch of clients you can use, including Seeker for Android and others for all platforms including Linux

“As a final note: One of the websites in the network, known as “JVTVlive” and likely run by Neamati, openly claims to have “2,000 servers in 198 countries” (jvtvlive[.]com/faq/). Based on the data we’re tracking, these bold claims appear to be accurate.”

LOL, this is an advertisement, and not for security services either.

Yes, I know, thats why I lol’ed

Lol, yep, then do a malicious redirection attack after getting a large user base which forces a drive-by-download of a malware package alongside the requested FLAC file.

I mean, a website where you make requests to download many files are pretty ripe for a bate and switch scenario. That said, I’m looking for more cybersecuroty savvy folks than myself to chime in with the all-clear after doing some actual checks and analysis.

My bigger question is how secure is it? Looks like low trust score new Russian website, what’s the chance of malware or other attacks?

No one talking about how this could completely annihilate open source .apk development? First off the lead dev has to get identity verified to get a key, which will reduce the number of devs willing to push through friction to start a project. Then when the key is issued and it is posted to the repository, what keeps anyone from grabbing it and using it for another repo? We’ll they have an official app registration of some kind, ok, what about version control? Does every new version have to be registered before it can be loaded and tested? Same for forks?

This is about to be a terrible mess, Google is assassinating FOSS with this.

Here’s a thing about LLMs, they will effectively make laws like this meaningless. Law comes in to enforce against a company building a program to block ads, extension goes off market. Someone asks their LLM “create an extension function referencing the same data set for my browser that performs the same function” boom new extension with no central point of distribution. Share the prompt on a forum, now everyone has a custom ad blocker. Or not so far down the road, LLM is directly built into the browser, no extension needed just prompt “do not display known advertisements on pages I request before loading, but perform background activity which gives feedback to the site that ads have loaded” boom done.

In a way, local LLMs are like distributed applications, they make enforcement against specific program functions pretty much impossible.

deleted by creator