Spotlight7573 @ Spotlight7573 @lemmy.world

Posts

7

Comments

265

Joined

2 yr. ago

In this case, it's less about the actionability of going after the pirate and more about using them as a witness to go after the ISP with deeper pockets by showing they failed to kick pirating users off of their service. They don't care that they downloaded it, they care that the users knew they wouldn't get in trouble for piracy with that ISP and that the ISP benefited from that by keeping pirating users subscriptions active. Testimony from pirating users about why they chose that ISP and how even they knew the ISP wouldn't do anything to resolve copyright violation issues could be pretty helpful in court.

From the article:

In this week's filing, the film studios claim that six Redditors' IP address logs are “clearly relevant and proportional to the needs of the case" because the Reddit users all made comments that either establish “that Frontier has not reasonably implemented a policy for terminating repeat infringers sufficient for a safe harbor affirmative” or that “the ability to freely pirate without consequence was a draw to becoming a subscriber of Frontier."

Last year, a Reddit user wrote that they received 44 emails from Frontier threatening to cut off their service due to torrent downloads, but “if they didn’t do it after 44 emails ... they won’t."

In 2022, another Reddit user said that they had used Frontier DSL for years and “despite the shitty internet, they didn’t give a shit what I downloaded.”

I'd be more worried about every company trying to force their users into using their own store to access their apps.

It's more that if you ask the app not to track you, there's nothing stopping the server you're connecting to with that app from continuing to track you. The server doesn't even know you opened incognito mode versus just a different browser profile and it would be more of a risk for fingerprinting/sites blocking you if it did have the ability to know if you were in incognito.

It's not the browser that's really the problem in this case, it's the tracking and building of user profiles across browser profiles and devices on the server side.

It’s not like police can legally lock you up because they thought you were going to do drugs in the future.

Uh... that does happen for some at least:

Pregnant women were jailed over drug use to protect fetuses, county says

Opposition to Criminalization of Individuals During Pregnancy and the Postpartum Period

The best response that I've seen to this so far is this video of a former student speaking to the school board:

Bridget, our first ever interaction was when you retweeted a hate article about me from The Nationalist while I was a Sarasota County school student. You are a reminder that some people view politics as a service to others while some view it as an opportunity for themselves. On this board you have spent public funds that could have been used to increase teacher pay to change our district lines for political gain, remove books from schools, target trans and queer children, erase black history, and elevate your political career, all while sending your children to private schools because you do not believe in the public school system that you've been leading. My question is why doesn't an elected official using our money to harm our students and our teachers for her gain seem to matter as much for us as her having a threesome does? Bridget Ziegler, you do not deserve to be on the Sarasota County School Board but you do not deserve to be removed from it for having a threesome. That defeats the lesson we've been trying to teach you which is that a politician's job is to serve their community, not to police personal lives. So, to be extra clear: Bridget, you deserve to be fired from your job because you are terrible at your job, not because you had sex with a woman.

Closest to the original source I can find (referenced in numerous news articles): https://www.tiktok.com/@queenofhives/video/7313654227564383530

I'm a little surprised we haven't heard about one of these smart TV brands using something like Amazon Sidewalk yet to communicate the analyzed data:

https://www.amazon.com/Amazon-Sidewalk/

A popular brand could totally set up their own network like this and with apartments there would probably be sufficient density to ensure that there's always at least one connected device nearby to act as a bridge.

I don't think there's a lack of empathy, especially when you consider that we may be concerned for the more numerous viewers who could potentially see your comments if we help you bypass the filters that you seem to be running into more than just occasionally.

It's not that they need to know that to provide a potential answer, it's that they want to know that before they decide to help you bypass a filter.

I'm pretty sure people are focused on what the content is because they have reservations about helping someone bypass filters to post stuff that may be offensive enough to be deleted in the first place.

Uh, weren't the pyramids built explicitly for the profit/benefit in the afterlife for those few rulers set to be entombed in them, at the cost of many human lives? I'm having a hard time thinking of something more self centered/personal profit focused right now.

I agree that the no algorithm hill gets annoying once you're following enough people.

What I don't understand is why they don't setup something like Bluesky has where you can choose which algorithm you want, including those not made directly by the Bluesky team: https://www.theverge.com/2023/5/26/23739174/bluesky-custom-feeds-algorithms-twitter-alternative

One of those algorithms could just be a chronological feed that some people seem dead set on sticking with. Everyone can be happy.

From my understanding, it's not quite the closest server:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36971650

I talked to the maintainer of archive.is years ago, they said this (hopefully they won't mind me posting):

There have been numerous attacks where people upload illegal content (childporn or isis propaganda) and immediately reported to the authorities near the IP of the archive. It resulted in ceased servers and downtimes. I just have no time to react. So I developed sort of CDN, with the only difference: DNS server returns not the closest IP to the request origin but the closest IP abroad, so any takedown procedure would require bureaucratic procedures so I am getting notified notified and have time to react.

But CloudFlare DNS disrupts the scheme together with all other DNS-based CDNs Cloudflare is competing with and puts the archive existence on risk. I offered them to proxy those CloudFlare DNS's users via their CDN but they rejected. Registering my own autonomous system just to fix the issue with CloudFlare DNS is too expensive for me.

So Cloudflare isn't doing anything wrong by passing DNS lookup results it gets from the archive.is servers to its customers instead of trying to 'fix' them somehow, but there does seem to be a somewhat legitimate reason for archive.is to be wanting the EDNS subnet information that Cloudflare does not provide due to customer privacy reasons.

A lot of sites are willing to have something that's good enough, rather than perfect, so if they find that using a list like this solves the majority of their abuse/deliverability issues, it's unfortunately pretty logical they'd use it for that.

I feel like having different attributes for each domain might be helpful so that those services using the list can filter for just the things they care about such as burner emails, anonymous registration, whether it requires any email/phone verification, etc. Right now domains kind of have the problem of just being on the list or not, with no indication on why they might be a problem.

That video doesn't seem to have actually fully completed the registration process at Outlook though.

The list that the repo maintains is for services that can provide burner or anonymous emails.

You can sign up for Proton Mail anonymously, as demonstrated by a frequent contributor to that repo in issue #414.

Therefore, it seems appropriate for it to be on that list, as annoying as that is.

I'd hope that site providers wouldn't just summarily ban any domains on that list but I understand why they may take that shortcut to reduce spam/abuse if they don't have adequate resources to handle it other ways.

Does turning the notifications off mean that it isn't sending these messages or is the app or OS just not displaying them?

Third party doctrine for one: the data held by third parties has no expectation of privacy, even if it's about you.

From Wikipedia:

The third-party doctrine is a United States legal doctrine that holds that people who voluntarily give information to third parties—such as banks, phone companies, internet service providers (ISPs), and e-mail servers—have "no reasonable expectation of privacy" in that information. A lack of privacy protection allows the United States government to obtain information from third parties without a legal warrant and without otherwise complying with the Fourth Amendment prohibition against search and seizure without probable cause and a judicial search warrant.

Basically the government's argument: if you wanted it to remain private, you wouldn't have given it to someone else.

I'm reality, it's an area of law that desperately needs to be updated.

To be more accurate: Mozilla does plan on deprecating MV2 once they have all of the MV3 stuff supported and sufficient time to transition has been given but they will make the the crucial "webRequestBlocking" API used by ad blockers available on MV3 (unlike Chrome) for those extensions that need it to do more than declarativeNetRequest allows for.

See: https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2022/11/17/manifest-v3-signing-available-november-21-on-firefox-nightly/

Towards the end of 2023 — once we’ve had time to evaluate and assess MV3’s rollout (including identifying important MV2 use cases that will persist into MV3) — we’ll decide on an appropriate timeframe to deprecate MV2.

From what most creators I've seen who talk about it say, premium users are worth more than ad supported users. There are more ad supported users overall than paying premium subscribers though. Pushing people to a more predictable subscription service would benefit YouTube by making it less dependent on advertisers and not as affected by ad blockers so I can unfortunately see why they are considering changes like this.