Gore already has been cracked down on. All the old gore sites like Live leak have shut down, Reddit has removed all the related subreddits, and governments quickly scrub the internet of videos like the New Zealand shooting.
You could get a rough location for free. Every time you send a message, “observer” nodes connected to the internet publish the packet, and in the packet is the repeater path taken, repeaters have known locations and the first repeater is going to be near you.
For countries, if you meaning connecting to VPS, lot of countries have good IPv6 connectivity now.
For me both ISPs I use have native v6. This will differ from person to person.
It is inconcievably stupid that github, run by a massive tech company like Microsoft, has not migrated to ipv6. They're single-handedly holding back adoption.
There may indeed be some tracking that MS does via IPv4, but it's not a good way to do it.
I suspect any such tracking is essentially just some cruft that snuck in (either their own or legislative) in the early 2000s, and nobody thinks it's their problem to make go away.
That said, that IPv4 is a poor way to do tracking doesn't guarantee there's no manager demanding it: any corporation eventually gets someone with no technical knowledge demanding bad solutions.
What gets me is this doesn’t even seem to be the most effective way to regulate this. 3D printed guns require a lot of non 3D printed gun parts. You can’t 3D print bullets for example.
The is really just a US specific issue where 90% what you need for a gun can be purchased easily, but the non functional handle requires registration, etc.
They could just make buying gun parts as strict as buying a whole gun
That’s why you have service/products that have the sole purpose of taking all these region specific data sources and processing them in to a generic json api.
The government orgs probably do it intentionally so they don’t have ten million devices pinging their servers to update weather widgets.
The open for anyone PR model might be at risk now. How can maintainers be expected to review unlimited slop coming in. I can see a lot of open source just giving up on allowing community contribution. Or maybe only allowing trusted members to contribute after they have demonstrated more than passing interest in the project.
It has been at risk for a long time, now it is in doubt.
Think of a scenario like
Attacker floods you with tons of AI slop to make your overloaded and at risk of making mistakes. These entries should have just enough basis in reality to avoid summary rejection.
Then the attacker puts in useful batch of code that fixes issues and injects a tricky security flaw.
If there's not a lot going on the second part is hard to pull off. But if you ruin the SnR it becomes more likely.
Better to use Google Translate for this than ChatGPT. Either ChatGPT massively changes the text and slopifies it, or people are lying about using it for translation only because the outputs are horrendous. Google Translate won't fluff out the output with garbage or reformat everything with emoji.
"Translate this from X to X, don't change any meaning or anything else, only translate the text with idiomatic usage in target language: X"
Using Google Translate probably means you're using a language model in the end anyways behind the scenes. Initially, the Transformer was researched and published as an improvement for machine translation, which eventually led to LLMs. Using them for translation is pretty much exactly what they excel at :)
Yep. If you don't know the language, it's best not to pretend you do.
I've done this kind of thing, even if I think it's likely they speak English. (I speak zero Japanese here.) It's just polite and you never know who's going to be reading it first.
I didn’t say GPTs in general. ChatGPT specifically should be avoided. So many people are posting the most blatant ChatGPT slop full of em dashes and emoji and then claiming they just used it to translate.
Isn’t the idea that the kernel will verify anything beneath it. Secure boot verifies the kernel and then it’s in the hands of the kernel to keep verifying or not.
Yes that's the case - my argument is that Linux currently doesn't have anything standardized to do that.
Your best bet for now is to use a read-only dm-verity-protected volume as the root partition, encode its hash in the initrd, combine kernel + initrd into a UKI and sign that.
Standardizing that approach is one thing that the systemd project has been working on. They've built various components to help with that, including writing specifications (via the UAPI group) on how that should all fit together.
ParticleOS[0] gives a look at how this can all fit together, in case you want to see some of it in action.
reply