[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

How is the drone going to determine that it is being used to commit a crime?

[-] [email protected] 22 points 2 weeks ago

I looked it up before posting. It's illegal in 48 states, including California where most of these companies are headquartered, and every state where major cloud data centers are located. This makes it effectively illegal by state laws, which is the worst kind of illegal in the United States when operating a service at a national level because every state will have slightly different laws. No company is going to establish a system that allows users in the two remaining states to exchange revenge porn with each other except maybe a website established solely for that purpose. Certainly Snapchat would not.

I've noticed recently there are many reactionary laws to make illegal specific things that are already illegal or should already be illegal because of a more general law. We'd be much better off with a federal standardization of revenge porn laws than a federal law that specifically outlaws essentially the same thing but only when a specific technology is involved.

[-] [email protected] 58 points 2 weeks ago

“This kid who is not getting any kind of real consequence other than a little bit of probation, and then when he’s 18, his record will be expunged, and he’ll go on with life, and no one will ever really know what happened,” McAdams told CNN.

“If [this law] had been in place at that point, those pictures would have been taken down within 48 hours, and he could be looking at three years in jail...so he would get a punishment for what he actually did,” McAdams told CNN.

There's a reason kids are tried as kids and their records are expunged when they become adults. Undoing that will just ruin lives without lessening occurrences.

“It’s still so scary as these images are off Snapchat, but that does not mean that they are not on students’ phones, and every day I’ve had to live with the fear of these photos getting brought up resurfacing,” Berry said. “By this bill getting passed, I will no longer have to live in fear knowing that whoever does bring these images up will be punished.”

This week, Republican Senator Ted Cruz, Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar and several colleagues co-sponsored a bill that would require social media companies to take down deep-fake pornography within two days of getting a report.

“[The bill] puts a legal obligation on the big tech companies to take it down, to remove the images when the victim or the victim's family asks for it,” Cruz said. “Elliston's Mom went to Snapchat over and over and over again, and Snapchat just said, ‘Go jump in a lake.’ They just ignored them for eight months.”

BS

It's been possible for decades for people to share embarrassing pictures of you, real or fake, on the internet. Deep fake technology is only really necessary for video.

Real or fake pornography including unwilling participants (revenge porn) is already illegal and already taken down, and because the girl is underage it's extra illegal.

Besides the legal aspect, the content described in the article, which may be an exaggeration of the actual content, is clearly in violation of Snapchat's rules and would have been taken down:

  • We prohibit any activity that involves sexual exploitation or abuse of a minor, including sharing child sexual exploitation or abuse imagery, grooming, or sexual extortion (sextortion), or the sexualization of children. We report all identified instances of child sexual exploitation to authorities, including attempts to engage in such conduct. Never post, save, send, forward, distribute, or ask for nude or sexually explicit content involving anyone under the age of 18 (this includes sending or saving such images of yourself).
  • We prohibit promoting, distributing, or sharing pornographic content, as well as commercial activities that relate to pornography or sexual interactions (whether online or offline).
  • We prohibit bullying or harassment of any kind. This extends to all forms of sexual harassment, including sending unwanted sexually explicit, suggestive, or nude images to other users. If someone blocks you, you may not contact them from another Snapchat account.
[-] [email protected] 22 points 1 month ago

The five year policy is for ChromeOS, not ChromiumOS. ChromiumOS-based devices may have more or less support.

[-] [email protected] 24 points 1 month ago

Why now? Other people have been profiting off of your Stack Overflow answers for years. This is nothing new.

[-] [email protected] 86 points 2 months ago

Are they going to officially allow third party apps at all? The stock app is terrible, and not just because of excessive, unskippable advertising and bizarre restrictions around background play. When you search for anything, at least half of the results are completely unrelated to what you searched for in an attempt to increase user engagement metrics. It keeps trying to get you to watch shorts in its bad TikTok clone. Sometimes it recommends unrelated shorts with disturbing thumbnails in the middle of your search results. It keeps autodetecting that the video quality should be 360p on a connection easily capable of 4k, and resetting back to 360p at the start of every new video. The UI for live streams puts things on top of other things that are more important.

[-] [email protected] 19 points 3 months ago

New action items have been assigned to you:

  • Remedial cybersecurity training (4hr): due by Mar 22
[-] [email protected] 42 points 3 months ago

My favorite is when IT deploys software that replaces all the links in your e-mails with https://example.com/phishing/YiCdMdsY so you can't tell whether the e-mail is phishing or not, frequently sends you very obvious fake phishing e-mails that interrupt your work by going straight to your priority inbox, and punishes anyone caught clicking on phishing e-mails. Then HR sends out e-mails that have all the indicators of low effort phishing and you're supposed to click on those.

[-] [email protected] 23 points 4 months ago

They say they won't block apps because of their content, but that they will protect users that use too much energy, which seems like a loophole for blocking emulators and alternative browsers.

[-] [email protected] 16 points 9 months ago

If the machine supports up to 32GB RAM, it probably only has the hardware for 32GB RAM. Maybe it only has 25 address lines for RAM.

[-] [email protected] 20 points 9 months ago

Astronomical, even.

[-] [email protected] 37 points 11 months ago

Surely the drive motors use far more energy than the computer, and the computer doesn't need to be fully powered on all the time.

view more: next ›

i_am_not_a_robot

joined 1 year ago