Here is the original fabric because that apparently doesn’t get linked in an article about solving who is on said fabric

https://imgur.com/gallery/recognize-celebrities-ao0hWN3

Underworld die an episode on this (use the YouTube link to find your platform of choice per the creators). There’s a lot of controversy around the whole thing and there’s a chance this is being done to save face. There’s basically no plausible explanation for a major cartel leader being kidnapped in this way so insiders think it was arranged by the parties. Mexico calling it kidnapping is an interesting escalation.

The only thing you need to know is that Randy Pitchford was involved. This guarantees it’s going to be a shitshow.

Just alias pdoman=podman. I do that with all my common typos.

don’t Instagram your crimes

I’ve already provided you CFAA prosecutions and security professionals, both of which you can go find data on yourself. What more do you want? A third population? You want me to go link you all the data? Do I need to chew your food for you too? Every single time I provide an answer you move the goalposts further and further.

You made the unsubstantiated claim that started this thread and you are continuing to make claims that you yourself have provided no data for. I’m still waiting for you to provide real examples of left-wing hackers focusing on torrents as a vector like your original comment.

You have no idea what you’re talking about and you constantly double down. Have fun with that.

You really don’t know the landscape, do you? Gay or furry hackers do, in fact, make up a significant number of security professionals. There are a ton of in-jokes about exactly this. There are several gay, furry hacking groups active at the moment, probably representing a large percentage of active groups outside of nation state APTs.

Now you’re moving the goalposts. You’re saying left-wing hackers need to go after something other than torrents but you haven’t even show that happens yet. You don’t understand your linked story if you think that applies.

I think stats-wise, less than 10% of those convicted under the CFAA are right-wing. I don’t consider state actors to fall under the category of “hackers;” that’s probably a personal bias. I would want you to categorize those states as left or right and then provide stats since that’s your thing and you brought them in. You’ll also need to define where hacks for clout or cash land, since that’s a huge percentage of CFAA convictions.

What? A good chunk of hackers are left-wing and go after authoritarian or repressive targets. I have no idea what you’re referring to unless you’re talking about the recent Korean ISP story which is so far off from your categorization.

The other option is Poe’s Law.

I did some cursory searches to find the actual arguments and came up blank. It’s important to note this isn’t the standard “video games cause violence” lawsuit that has absolutely no merit. This is different. The summary presented in articles is that this gun manufacturer explicitly marketed their product for things like this using a sophisticated campaign. If I understand the summary correctly, it therefore hinges on both the marketing of this specific gun and its presence across the digital landscape. The parents aren’t going after shooting in games; they’re going after a company that actively markets its products on social media and in video games.

It’s novel. I’m kinda skeptical because the solution would have to limit product placement and advertisement which has a massive lobby. There’s also nothing that really says “this specific gun leads to violence” without implicitly relying on the whole “video games cause violence” which is bullshit.

That’s fair. I don’t disagree with licensing comments necessarily. I think users doing it to provide the basis for a legal argument is fine. I think my pushback comes from my lack of trust in any of these users actually acting on their license which could be construed as victim-shaming. I’m hung up on the follow-through which careful analysis like yours really highlights.

Calling a license by anything other than its name and stated purpose is something I’d dare to call mislabeling. If CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 decides to add “anti-commercial-AI” then and only then is it not mislabeling. That’s like me calling the US copyrights of the books sitting next to me “anti-bitfucker” licenses. They have nothing to do with you at this point in time so it is misleading for me to claim otherwise.

While you are correct that lemmy itself does not add a license and many instances do not add a license, it’s not as simple as “the user notifies [you] must abides by [their] licenses.” Jurisdiction matters. The Fediverse host content is pulled from matters. Other myriad factors matter. As you correctly pointed out, there is no precedence for any of this so as I pointed out unless you’re willing to go to court and can prove damages it is actually useless.

I feel like a better analogy is someone who signs their text messages which is a more recent problem than people with obnoxiously long forum signatures.

They’re mislabeling the license too. CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 has nothing to do with “anti-commercial-AI.” It provides some terms for using content and, in theory if OP is willing to take someone to court, should provide some basis if the license is being abused. Until there’s actual precedence, though, it’s debatable whether or not sucking up CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 content is a breach of the license. For it to actually matter, someone needs to demonstrably prove 1) CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 content was sucked up by AI, 2) it was their content and it was licensed at the time, 3) the terms of the license were violated, and 4) other legal shit that will pop up during the course of the litigation. “Someone” has to be someone with deep fucking pockets willing to go the distance in many international jurisdictions.

I really struggle with the justification present in the article. “I need to emulate to do my job as an academic” is pretty hollow. “I want to emulate because I want to learn” is the real reason and, as an academic myself, I don’t feel like there’s a higher ground that gives me access to literally anything I want just because I want to learn.

If the argument was “the copyright system is fucked and knowledge needs to be more open” I would be 100% behind that. I feel that way. I just don’t think someone should get to say “show me your secrets because I’ve arbitrarily decided to make my next publication about your secrets.”

This article is about a year old. You can play a demo these days. Dunno if it’s any good.

Multiple teams are being cut, at least at Arkane Austin. I don’t know the total heads rolling. Many of my friends are now out of a job. The severance isn’t terrible, at least for some of the engineers. That’s not better than a job, though.

A problem so common it has an official page

The $150 isn’t for the new game mode. People that paid $150 were told they’d get all DLC. The devs are saying this isn’t DLC and these folks will get it for free once the game is out of early access. People that paid $250 can play this now. People that paid any more will have some level of discount to purchase access to this mode.

It’s all in the article.

This doesn’t appear to cover the cost of the electricity it would take to keep your stuff running. There is no way to pay anything out at all. Seems like a pretty straightforward pump-and-dump where the end users are collecting imaginary points while some company abuses their resources. Every blog and Reddit post I looked at to try to understand this was full of referral links. Equally classic sign of pump-and-dump pyramid scheme.