zestier's recent activity
-
Comment on Elon Musk plans to take on Wikipedia with 'Grokipedia' in ~tech
-
Comment on Updates to Xbox Game Pass: Introducing Essential, Premium, and Ultimate plans in ~games
zestier (edited )Link ParentWhile this would be an absurd thing for them to actually do, the weird way they're positioned makes me think that if they want to continue making consoles they should just ship a well-performing...While this would be an absurd thing for them to actually do, the weird way they're positioned makes me think that if they want to continue making consoles they should just ship a well-performing plug-and-play box that has full compatibility across all Windows games (at least as much as anyone would expect of a custom PC) that just directly integrates the various competing storefronts, although presumably via some cross-service integration (like needing to link Xbox and Steam, Epic, GOG, etc accounts). The idea being that rather than fighting this losing battle against Steam where Steam is making it easier than ever to drop Windows, embrace it and capture the audience that wants a Steam box for their TV that doesn't have the limitations of Proton. Make that audience stop being interested in competing OSes and compatibility layers by just supplying the box that "just works" for what they want as a route to steer them back into the MS ecosystem. Send a signal to developers that they can stop thinking about a future that needs to consider Linux compatibility of future "Steam boxes" because Microsoft is embracing Windows as a gaming OS for all users, including console users, so go ahead and just help entrench Microsoft rather than supporting those other boxes that lack a competitive advantage now that they aren't the only ones with Steam library support.
I obviously don't see any of that as even remotely realistic though. Doing it would mean sacrificing the storefront slice that they want, although if I'm being realistic that's probably not doing great for them anyway. It's possible they would be literally better off giving that up just focusing on the revenue streams they could extract from being the hardware platform, such as data harvesting and integrated ads. A model much closer to something like a Roku.
-
Comment on Updates to Xbox Game Pass: Introducing Essential, Premium, and Ultimate plans in ~games
zestier (edited )Link ParentA bit off topic: PC Hollow Knight and Silksong are both easy to mod and have mods that lower difficulty. Only really mentioning this because you mentioned doing it for E33. More on topic: the way...A bit off topic: PC Hollow Knight and Silksong are both easy to mod and have mods that lower difficulty. Only really mentioning this because you mentioned doing it for E33.
More on topic: the way Microsoft has consolidated their gaming platforms such that they've more-or-less erased the divide between console and PC is.... interesting. On one hand it's kind of cool and better for customers, but on the other it massively devalues the console because there will be practically no console exclusives. Aside from wanting the Game Pass subscription itself the it feels like most people will find themselves better served by Steam, which is just a very weird market position. This leaves the console seemingly only targeting the segment that wants a plug-and-play solution rather than a gaming PC minus those that would pick PlayStation or Switch instead.
-
Comment on What programming/technical projects have you been working on? in ~comp
zestier (edited )Link ParentIn my experience the roughest part of using .local URLs is that some clients don't handle it by default. The first time this bit me I spent a lot of time thinking I'd configured it wrong somehow...In my experience the roughest part of using .local URLs is that some clients don't handle it by default. The first time this bit me I spent a lot of time thinking I'd configured it wrong somehow before finally realizing it was just that I needed to install something else on the client machine because it wasn't even attempting to support .local with the default resolution settings.
-
Comment on imgur.com geoblocks the UK in ~tech
zestier (edited )Link ParentThat's the same issue. They're told it'll protect children, even though as your link states few think it will, and few people think about what it entails or are willing to publicly oppose a...That's the same issue. They're told it'll protect children, even though as your link states few think it will, and few people think about what it entails or are willing to publicly oppose a "protect the children" act.
Based on the numbers from that page a majority of those polled think it won't even solve the problem. Assuming I'm reading the numbers right, at least 33% of respondents in support also said it would be ineffective. Why would so many people support something they don't think will work? It being potentially damaging to say they oppose it paired with not really understanding the wide-reaching effects explains that gap far better than the idea that people want to give up privacy for something that they don't even think will be effective.
-
Comment on imgur.com geoblocks the UK in ~tech
zestier (edited )Link ParentIt is possible you're right, but I suspect the general populace doesn't really know what it is beyond that it claims to protect children. It's easy to get people to agree with "we should protect...It is possible you're right, but I suspect the general populace doesn't really know what it is beyond that it claims to protect children. It's easy to get people to agree with "we should protect children" when you focus on that over what the legislation actually is. Legislation branded under "think of the children" is quite effective specifically because it is difficult to publicly oppose no matter how problematic the details within actually are.
I think the average person tends to just not care until they have to, like if services they care about stop working. Pushback like Apple claiming that some legislation is invasive enough to conflict with their stance on user privacy would, at least in my mind, make many more people seriously question what's really in there.
It feels somewhat similar to the Patriot Act in the US to me. Of course people would say they supported legislation labeled as antiterrorist after 9/11 regardless of having any idea of what it contained in practice. Optics are not great on publicly opposing antiterrorism and they're similarly terrible on opposing child abuse protections, and that's sadly the case even at times that those labels aren't even accurate.
-
Comment on imgur.com geoblocks the UK in ~tech
zestier (edited )LinkThat's unfortunate. I'm not in the UK, but as an outsider this is the response I've been personally wishing was more common. The closer the Internet feels to unusable under the OSA the more...That's unfortunate. I'm not in the UK, but as an outsider this is the response I've been personally wishing was more common. The closer the Internet feels to unusable under the OSA the more pressure there would be to get rid if it.
To give a larger example that I think could have huge effect: a statement from Apple like "We believe in the privacy of our users and it is not possible to maintain our high privacy and security expectations under [insert various UK big brother laws]. Effective [date] we sadly will no longer service the UK." feels to me like it would induce a panicked forced rollback as millions and millions get immediately pissed at their legislators about their soon-to-be-broken iPhones.
-
Comment on Will an AI actress really become ‘the next Scarlett Johansson’? in ~movies
zestier (edited )Link ParentTo me the idea seems absurd less because of scarcity and more because it feels like it ignores the whole reason that big names are thrown front and center on posters to sell movies: lots of people...To me the idea seems absurd less because of scarcity and more because it feels like it ignores the whole reason that big names are thrown front and center on posters to sell movies: lots of people think "I like this person's work" and go to see it. I don't personally foresee enough people ever having that thought about any AI character to make those projects make any sense.
To pick just a random movie, take Bob Odenkirk off the poster of Nobody and now the name is also the list of all the people that would bother to see it.
-
Comment on How many valid JSON strings are there? in ~comp
zestier (edited )Link ParentTechnically a separate spec, but is present on https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc7159/ from 2014. So a confirmation that something closely related did change.Technically a separate spec, but
A JSON text is a sequence of tokens. The set of tokens includes six structural characters, strings, numbers, and three literal names.
A JSON text is a serialized value. Note that certain previous specifications of JSON constrained a JSON text to be an object or an array. Implementations that generate only objects or arrays where a JSON text is called for will be interoperable in the sense that all implementations will accept these as conforming JSON texts.
JSON-text = ws value wsis present on https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc7159/ from 2014. So a confirmation that something closely related did change.
-
Comment on How many valid JSON strings are there? in ~comp
zestier (edited )Link ParentThis has an RFC to answer how to correctly use it: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8259/. Technically it has multiple RFCs. Over the decades they have been superseded a couple times. From a...This has an RFC to answer how to correctly use it: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8259/.
Technically it has multiple RFCs. Over the decades they have been superseded a couple times. From a skim it looks like it's been over a decade since a conforming parser has been allowed to reject non-object/array root values. This amusingly means that everyone in this thread may be using the same definition, but just from different times. Prior to 2014 the only two starting characters required to be supported were { and [.
-
Comment on How many valid JSON strings are there? in ~comp
zestier (edited )Link ParentYou made me curious so I started poking around more. I cannot find any evidence that "JSON Document" has an official definition. The closest I could find was a JSON Schema post saying that it uses...You made me curious so I started poking around more. I cannot find any evidence that "JSON Document" has an official definition. The closest I could find was a JSON Schema post saying that it uses "JSON Document", "JSON data", "JSON text", and "JSON value" interchangeably, but that's obviously outside the JSON spec and actually implies that it lacks a definition (otherwise why specify this?).
On a personal level, I would define a JSON Document as any content that could correctly use "application/json" as the content type.
-
Comment on How many valid JSON strings are there? in ~comp
zestier Link ParentThe post focuses on the number of valid strings for each length. I initially had a similar thought, but the author takes a more reasonable approach to answer specifically bounded scenarios more...The post focuses on the number of valid strings for each length. I initially had a similar thought, but the author takes a more reasonable approach to answer specifically bounded scenarios more like "How many 100 character strings can be parsed as valid JSON?"
-
Comment on NET Dollar by Cloudflare in ~finance
zestier Link ParentI have been wondering if they even need it to be "proper" crypto. Conceptually if its so centralized anyway why not just use a database? I wonder if its a regulatory thing. Like if they use a...I have been wondering if they even need it to be "proper" crypto. Conceptually if its so centralized anyway why not just use a database?
I wonder if its a regulatory thing. Like if they use a normal database it puts them too close to being a regular payment processor and ending up regulated like one?
-
Comment on NET Dollar by Cloudflare in ~finance
zestier (edited )LinkA stable coin coming out of Cloudflare makes a lot of sense to me conceptually, but I feel like the way they've positioned it is very dumb. Cloudflare is quite a trusted entity. Way more than...A stable coin coming out of Cloudflare makes a lot of sense to me conceptually, but I feel like the way they've positioned it is very dumb.
Cloudflare is quite a trusted entity. Way more than Crypto-centric companies such as Tether (as an aside, in my opinion it is unlikely Tether is fully backed and is a ponzi scheme that is just still waiting to explode). If they had a privacy-focused coin positioned for things like international payments, accountless pay-as-you-view news articles, content creator tipping, and the various other interactions mentioned elsewhere in this thread I could see the appeal. But positioning it for AI comes with a kind of off putting ick that feels like a poor vision trying to capitalize on currently relevant buzzwords rather than solve real problems.
AI users would probably be fine with regular crypto and without Cloudflare being involved anyway. Cloudflare has done well in curating a reputation of pushing security and privacy disconnected from the content policing policies of traditional payment processors, so I could see why people would be interested in that but not really why AI agent automation would care to use CF in particular.
-
Comment on Disney decides it hasn’t angered people enough, announces Disney+ price hikes in ~tv
zestier (edited )Link ParentThat is a real concern. It usually gets handwaved away though with claims that they'll just switch to a different debrid. On the side of "I'll just switch": the torrents themselves are the...That is a real concern. It usually gets handwaved away though with claims that they'll just switch to a different debrid.
On the side of "I'll just switch": the torrents themselves are the content, not the debrid cache. So if someone wants the content on another service the main price to pay is just the time for it to download from torrent again. Since debrid services tend to not really house much other state beyond "here are the torrents you've added and whether or not they're currently in cache" this argument is mostly fair. To use the Stremio example, their Stremio account stores what they're watching and its progress and all that on their end and the debrid only gets involved when Stremio directly requests a specific file to play.
On the side of "losing it would suck": debrid caches can be rather significant. There can be, and often is, content with 0 seeders but is available due to having previously been cached. When someone switches debrid providers they also switch to the new provider's cache, which may or may not be significantly smaller. There's also the obvious direct monetary loss for users from that a service that is being forced to shut down is unlikely to refund the time that is paid for but not serviced.
And yeah, I'm not trying to debate anything either. I just find this topic interesting so wanted to share some of what I learned from independent research after a different thread about Stremio.
-
Comment on Disney decides it hasn’t angered people enough, announces Disney+ price hikes in ~tv
zestier (edited )Link ParentReal Debrid has already been sued and the effects were rather negligible. They had to purge their cache of a bunch of content and I think add those torrent infohashes to a block list. They also...Real Debrid has already been sued and the effects were rather negligible. They had to purge their cache of a bunch of content and I think add those torrent infohashes to a block list. They also had to remove some feature I don't recall, but it overall still works fine. Blocking some infohashes does little because people frequently upload alternatives with slight changes that mean new hashes (different encoding, different audio or subtitle language options, different resolutions, etc.).
There are also a bunch of other debrid services, including ones that headquarter in areas that aren't as interested in accepting copyright suits. RD is in France, but as an example that I hope I remember correctly TorBox is in South Africa and seems to be depending a bit on that South Africa is less likely to care about copyright infringement of Western media empires.
A rather standard setup is Stremio + Torrentio + Debrid. Stremio would claim they don't support piracy, but also don't monitor addons. Torrentio would claim all they do is wrap existing public trackers in a Stremio addon, but don't have any data of their own. Debrid would claim they aren't for piracy and it's on the users to not download copyrighted content, not them to invasively monitor what every torrent contains. A weird liability shell game.
-
Comment on I tried to protect my kids from the internet. Here’s what happened. in ~tech
zestier (edited )Link ParentMany people, including myself, aren't cool with their ISP or DNS provider having all their info either. Giving yet another party, especially some of the least trustable parties in businesses that...Many people, including myself, aren't cool with their ISP or DNS provider having all their info either. Giving yet another party, especially some of the least trustable parties in businesses that make a ton from data harvesting and ads, even more in the name of a "protect the children" campaign that is unlikely to do anything except further strip any semblance of privacy just does not feel like an answer.
I find your last paragraph in particular to read almost like the "well if you've got nothing to hide..." falacy. Maybe you're cool with a more deeply entrenched surveillance state, but we still haven't recovered the privacy lost under the Patriot Act and many of us respectfully discount your support for further erosion.
I'm also not sure how much you know about the data gathered, who has what, and how they get it. Your DNS provider has, at best, the domains you accessed. With TLS your ISP has, at best, the IPs of the servers you connect to and maybe the domain names. Obviously they can also get some times and amount of traffic, but it is deliberately minimal because anything your ISP can get through these methods is available to any possible man-in-the-middle attacker. If you use masking tools you can change which party gets those to not even be your ISP. The fact that hiding info from your ISP is possible is why torrenting is normally done on a VPN. And work is being done to further reduce who sees what, such as DNS over HTTPS hiding the domain name from more parties (such as the ISP).
De-anonymizing data is also surprisingly easy and the more data you have the easier it is to do so. It is also wrong to state the government can't do it. They can and do. A fun fact about the US government is that they can get third parties to do stuff they themselves aren't technically allowed to. The US government does buy data from data brokers, including things they can't collect themselves. For example, there are data brokers that the police can use to virtually follow people around with no warrant or cause by paying data brokers to tell them when and where the target's car passes in front of privately-owned cameras placed all over the place, which surprise surprise has been horrifically misused by the police.
-
Comment on I tried to protect my kids from the internet. Here’s what happened. in ~tech
zestier (edited )Link ParentIt is different in a variety of ways that makes that kind of regulation idea impractical: Browsers are applications, not services. So all someone has to do to bypass such a thing is use a...It is different in a variety of ways that makes that kind of regulation idea impractical:
- Browsers are applications, not services. So all someone has to do to bypass such a thing is use a different application, which is easy. There may not be any other wallet services that ever made and even if others get made then if regulators don't like it it's easy to prevent it from operating in the US (blocking a company vs trying to block every person from downloading a different browser).
- A lot of web traffic isn't in the browser anyway. See: seemingly every website on the internet begging you to install their apps.
- Attempts to do that are generally easier to do at the ISP level. Famously what you do can and does get tracked to some extent already. For example, go torrent some Disney movies without a VPN and wait for your copyright infringement letter.
- These businesses, such as Google and Apple, would likely lobby hard against making applications used by enterprises, such as browsers, be turned into this kind of spyware because the security teams of tons of organizations, probably including the US government itself, would ban them immediately. This isn't a problem for personal identity verification though.
This is very different than an application that has your complete identity in their wallet apps being gatekeepers to the web. To me it's kind of like asking why BitTorrent clients aren't regulated to require blocking copyrighted content when the answer is that obviously people would just install different ones that don't comply.
And what additional information do they have? Literally my whole identity! Sure my ISP can figure out what banks I use and a compromised browser could get my identity, but I could easily just not use their potentially spyware browsers. I already don't use either of them, although for unrelated reasons.
-
Comment on I tried to protect my kids from the internet. Here’s what happened. in ~tech
zestier (edited )Link ParentThis is quite a strawman. Localized entities carrying physical goods, especially ones like liquor stores that that don't have real incentive for a malicious government to misuse (politicians don't...This is quite a strawman. Localized entities carrying physical goods, especially ones like liquor stores that that don't have real incentive for a malicious government to misuse (politicians don't care which individuals drink or smoke) aren't really comparable to the digital content of the internet in this way.
I'm also not trying to say nothing should be done. As a concrete example, Roblox is in desperate need of serious regulatory intervention. But I don't think the answer is that there should be some "trusted" gatekeepers to the internet because there are no options that are trustworthy, nor will there ever be because they'd be so easy to corrupt. This administration would happily state anything related to transgenderism needs to be age gated and force Google and Apple to collect and disclose who tries to access those age gates even if it meant breaking their zero trust protocol. And to top it off age verification doesn't even help with poorly moderated platforms like Roblox anyway.
-
Comment on I tried to protect my kids from the internet. Here’s what happened. in ~tech
zestier (edited )Link ParentMy personal answer to who could do it well is, "no one, ever". Any authority will have too much data, too many bad incentives, too much risk when compromised, and horrible effects when governments...My personal answer to who could do it well is, "no one, ever". Any authority will have too much data, too many bad incentives, too much risk when compromised, and horrible effects when governments come along and force disclosures and backdoors.
And all for a system I believe unlikely to work. People will just use ones outside their jurisdiction, VPNs, piracy, unmoderated channels, or stolen credentials. Even if we believe in a true zero trust implemention with no connecting data we now have the problem that proper zero trust would make it rather trivial to abuse a small amount of compromised accounts (ex. if a porn site just gets an attestation that the user is an adult how do they know that there aren't 1000 signups that came from one kid that grabbed his dad's phone and sold access? Or even worse predators explicitly using access to these to gain contact with minors? In true zero trust no one knows.), so how long does it even stay zero trust before these centralized authorities are regulated into collecting all the data anyway (maybe even due to their own lobbying)?
If anything, I think the actual result would be that minors seeking such content end up in much more dangerous places that lack the checks. Like discord and telegram channels that are knowingly sharing porn to minors as part of grooming efforts.
AI lawsuits are complicated, but that sounds to me like a prime example of one that could win. The precedent so far seems to be that it's fine to gobble up everyone else's data, regardless of if you would normally have the right to even have it, for as long as your product transforms what it is. For example, an LLM is not a book.
Saying that they want to hoover up someone's data to repackage it as the exact same kind of directly competing product though is an entirely different beast. If Amazon was ingesting books with the purpose to emit books that are direct replacements to existing ones so that they could keep all the sale proceeds I think those authors would have very strong cases. So unless Wikipedia's licensing allows for that it seems very legally problematic.