Yeah, sure clean all yards but start with your own.

Do you say that to Europe, to China, or both?

It’s obvious you’re addressing only Europe. Why?

This is what I meant with ‘The West bad, China bad okay’. It’s hypocritical. It’s double-standards. It’s ignorant and disgusting.

What about cleaning all yards? This ‘the West bad, China bad okay’ stance is dehumanising and ignorant. [Edit typo.]

I posted this elsewhere already, but it also fits here goven many of the posts in this thread: It is not just about data/privacy concerns (which are underestimated imo, as China pursues an own agenda with collecting your data through Chinese tech) and ‘unfair’ subsidies, but about gross human rights violations.

In short, some parts of the cheap Chinese cars are made in concentration camps where people are forced to work under catastrophic conditions.

Yes. We need human responsibility for everything what AI does. It’s not the technology that harms but human beings and those who profit from it.

You wouldn’t trust the Chinese supplier (or any supplier). You’d go to the bauxite shipment company and let them register with the network, you’d send independent auditors to their premises, very much as we do it with ibdependent audits nowadays.

We do need to physically access the premises across the supply chain to verify that ‘on-chain personas’ reflect their ‘real’ identities. But no single authority can control the data, we can be quite sure that all transfers of ownership across the supply chain have been authorized by their controllers. Compared to centralized systems, the blockchain provides us a much higher level of transparency and certainty over the fidelity of the information.

there’s no way tovtrack where resources, material, items come from, who made them

Independent audits are done -they are very common in many industry for a variety of reasons- and they work if done properly.

We could even track the provenance of each material through a trustless system like a blockchain to guarantuee a high level of credibility and transparency, just to name a relatively new technology. This is done already.

They have been already managing that for a long time. Independent audits are common - except in a few countries.

Forced labour in Chinese prisons isn’t limited to Xinjiang, nor to the car industry. A lot products we use in Europe and North America and elsewhere around the globe are made by Chinese prisoners forced to work under catastrophic conditions.

There is strong evidence for this provided by many independent sources, among them a documentary by Arte (a French-German media outlet). If interested:

Forced Labour - SOS from a Chinese Prisoner – (documentary, 95 min.)

A desperate cry for help written in Chinese was discovered in a pregnancy test sold in France and made in a Chinese factory. It revealed a hidden world of Chinese prison-companies where prisoners are forced to work for 15 hour days manufacturing products for export. This documentary tries to find out who wrote the letter.

(And, yes, prison labour exists also in the U.S., and it is as evil, but this doesn’t make the autocratic Chinese government any better.)

This is maybe a good idea. What would an emoji analysis tell us about a network? 😃

Data Leak at Anthropic Due to Contractor Error

TL;DR - Anthropic had a data leak due to a contractor’s mistake, but says no sensitive info was exposed. It wasn’t a system breach, and there’s no sign of malicious intent.

The article doesn’t say which classifier algorithm they use in that case in India.

We had a similar incident in the Netherlands last year, for example, with similar problems. There they used Gradient Boosting afaik. But it doesn’t really matter as all these algorithms will yield a high number of false positives. If we use this and blindly trust trust the result in sensitive areas such as social welfare, we cause a lot if harm to iur society.

https://novacustom.com

Or with Coreboot: https://minifree.org

YouTube Says New 5-Second Video Load Delay Is Supposed to Punish Ad Blockers, Not Firefox Users

Firefox users are reporting an ‘artificial’ load time on YouTube videos. YouTube says it’s part of a plan to make people who use adblockers “experience suboptimal viewing, regardless of the browser they are using.”

You’re right. A blockchain doesn’t solve the double-spending problem, so don’t create decentralized payment networks. Let’s use something like Paypal instead, you know, the one that will sooner or later merge with this single-letter company.

You can also use Google Pay or Apple Pay, and developers can use their stores to monetize their apps. Just 30% or so commission and the apps ‘adjusted’ to the stores’ rules (to be fair, there are not really soooo many trackers, right?).

Proof of provenance isn’t a use case either. Use Amazon servers. Microsoft Azure. They store all the data, and it’s safe.

We don’t need companies like drife.io or particl.io. We have Uber and Amazon. Centralized services are much better. They are so good for humanity that their companies don’t even have to pay taxes.

The cult of the dead cow has recently announced promising projects. I’m also looking forward to them.

I agree on what you say about the ways PDFs are used today, but back in the 1982 the world was different. Back then it was a useful thing imho.

There’s is also Jstor Open Content and Sci-hub, just fyi.

Edit: I forgot libgen (simply speaking, libgen is for books what sci-hub is for papers).

@morry040

@jarfil

Worldcoin’s latest funding round was back in the fall, it raised USD 115m from the venture fund Blockchain Capital as lead investor, other investors included a16z crypto, Bain Capital Crypto, and Distributed Global.

In 2021 and 2022, there have been at least 3 other funding rounds with a total volume of at least USD 215m.

Last year the MIT Technology Review published an extensive research report. It’s a very long read but it’s worth the time if I may say so.

Deception, exploited workers, and cash handouts: How Worldcoin recruited its first half a million test users

Our [MIT] investigation revealed wide gaps between Worldcoin’s public messaging, which focused on protecting privacy, and what users experienced. We found that the company’s representatives used deceptive marketing practices, collected more personal data than it acknowledged, and failed to obtain meaningful informed consent. These practices may violate the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR)—a likelihood that the company’s own data consent policy acknowledged and asked users to accept—as well as local laws. […]

Pete Howson, a senior lecturer at Northumbria University who researches cryptocurrency in international development, categorizes Worldcoin’s actions as a sort of crypto-colonialism, where “blockchain and cryptocurrency experiments are being imposed on vulnerable communities essentially because…these people can’t push back,” he told MIT Technology Review in an email.

@Elw

I agree with what you say about inequality and get your point, though I am not sure whether exactly these individuals were in urgent need of extra 50 bucks. A major point here is information and education here (or, better, the lack of it).