Glass0448

Glass0448 , 6 days ago

stuck on decrappified windows for the immediate future.

Glass0448 , 21 days ago

Cartoon CSAM is illegal in the United States. Pretty sure the judges will throw his images under the same ruling.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_Act_of_2003

https://www.thefederalcriminalattorneys.com/possession-of-lolicon

Glass0448 , 21 days ago

Currently, we do not outlaw written depictions nor drawings of child sexual abuse

Cartoon CSAM is illegal in the United States

https://www.thefederalcriminalattorneys.com/possession-of-lolicon

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_Act_of_2003

Glass0448 , 21 days ago

OMG. Every other post is saying their disgusted about the images part but it's a grey area, but he's definitely in trouble for contacting a minor.

Cartoon CSAM is illegal in the United States. AI images of CSAM fall into that category. It was illegal for him to make the images in the first place BEFORE he started sending them to a minor.

https://www.thefederalcriminalattorneys.com/possession-of-lolicon

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_Act_of_2003

Glass0448 , 21 days ago

The major concern to me, is that there isn’t really any guidance from the FBI on what you can and can’t do, which may lead to some big issues.

The Protect Act of 2003 means that any artistic depiction of CSAM is illegal. The guidance is pretty clear, FBI is gonna raid your house.....eventually. We still haven't properly funded the anti-CSAM departments.

Glass0448 , 21 days ago

Simulated crimes aren’t crimes.

Artistic CSAM is definitely a crime in the United States. PROTECT act of 2003.

Glass0448 , 21 days ago

Asked whether more funding will be provided for the anti-paint enforcement divisions: it's such a big backlog, we'll rather just wait for somebody to piss of a politician to focus our resources.

Glass0448 , 21 days ago

It would be illegal in the United States. Artistic depictions of CSAM are illegal under the PROTECT act 2003.

Glass0448 , 21 days ago

The generated stuff is as illegal as the real stuff. https://www.thefederalcriminalattorneys.com/possession-of-lolicon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_Act_of_2003

Glass0448 , 21 days ago

so many people still think it should be illegal

It is illegal. https://www.thefederalcriminalattorneys.com/possession-of-lolicon

Glass0448 , 21 days ago

Creating the pics is a crime by itself. https://www.thefederalcriminalattorneys.com/possession-of-lolicon

Glass0448 , 21 days ago

Making the CSAM is illegal by itself https://www.thefederalcriminalattorneys.com/possession-of-lolicon

Title is pretty accurate.

Glass0448 , 21 days ago

It's not ok to do this. https://www.thefederalcriminalattorneys.com/possession-of-lolicon

Glass0448 , 21 days ago

Stable Diffusion has been distancing themselves from this. The model that allows for this was leaked from a different company.

Glass0448 , 21 days ago

And also it's an AI.

13k images before AI involved a human with Photoshop or a child doing fucked up shit.

13k images after AI is just forgetting to turn off the CSAM auto-generate button.

Glass0448 , 20 days ago

It seems to me to be a lesser charge. A net that catches a larger population and they can then go fishing for bigger fish to make the prosecutor look good. Or as I've heard from others, it is used to simplify prosecution. PedoAnon can't argue "it's a deepfake, not a real kid" to the SWAT team.

There is a massive disconnect between what we should be seeing, and what we are seeing. I assume because the authorities who moderate this shit almost exclusively go after real CSAM, on account of it actually being a literal offense, as opposed to drawn CSAM, being a proxy offense.
This can be attributed to no proper funding of CSAM enforcement. Pedos get picked up if they become an active embarrassment like the article dude. Otherwise all the money is just spent on the database getting bigger and keeping the lights on. Which works for congress. A public pedo gets nailed to the wall because of the database, the spooky spectre of the pedo out for your kids remains, vote for me please....

Glass0448 , 18 days ago

Everybody is American. They just don't know it yet.

Gospel of the Jesus

Glass0448 OP , 1 month ago

Well you see, those victims are just untouchables, whereas Pirates attack the property of the rich....

Glass0448 , 1 month ago

The apps requirement pisses me off. Both Android/IOS have some sort of pass system.

Glass0448 , 1 month ago

I kinda like the baseline security advantages. Not that android can't be better in security, but none of my friends give a shit, and so my iphone friends walk around with better baseline security.

https://old.reddit.com/user/ghostinshell000

hello ,

ok, here is more than a few posts on this. that said:
both have made alot of strides recently, basically the order of consensus is:

• a google pixel flashed with graphaneos
• iphone
• pixel
• samsung and use adb to remove everything you can.

also, how the devices are setup and used matter alot. other than a pixel + graphaneos,
iphones tend to be better at privacy but the devil is in the details. iphones are also more "hygienic" in alot of ways, that you cant see. BUT android is open source for the most part, and are HGIGHLY configurable. and hardware wise has wider variety of choices.

security wise also pixel + graphaneos tends to be top shelf. but iphones, tend to have decent track record. and with proper setup and some addons, it really locks down pretty decently. for other androids, the proper addons, and adb mode to remove all the junk.

support wise? pretty much apple kills it, and everyone else is second and in some cases
really distant second or even worse. also google does csam scanning and has blocked folks in false positives and the support structure does not have any way for manual review
to get your account back it takes months of fighting them from the reports I have read.

this is all part of the really bad support model thats google. while, google one support of easy things is decent, when it gets real your chances get dicey.......

apples support is decent on all levels, not great but decent and in almost all cases better then googles.

data protection? its an apple game now, you can enable adp and the key that encrypts your data is yours and apple documents what key encrypts what data. google, on the other hand, says they encrypt things but the dont really have any good documentation on whats encrypted and whos key encrypts what noor do they allow you to use a key you create like apple does.

backup and recover? while they both do it, apples backup and restore is light years better,
googles works, but app level stuff the app devs must create a manifest which tells the backup process what to backup etc. so, over all they both work, its just that apples works better.

applepay vs googlepay, they both work and both are secure, but apples doing full tokenization and googles doing virtual credit card numbers to front for your real card, googles nebales more compatibility with banks easier, apple requires actual setup and key exchanges to onboard each bank. but in the long run while both are considered good, apples is the better way.

IOT and automation, both have a ton of automation, tho googles probably ahead here. but for the iot and home stuff a new standard "matter" will standardize it all so future state wont matter what device you have.

thats it for now.

Glass0448 OP , 1 month ago

That's just giving up your rights from the get go. They can get a warrant to compel the fingerprint.

In this computer age, warrant requests are a button press to send a docusign e-mail to a judge, who can click the sign button while he sips his cappuccino. Make them work for it.

Glass0448 OP , 1 month ago

Soon?

Glass0448 OP , 1 month ago

The right to not surrender a pass code has actually not yet been decided. We already have differences between regions.

Glass0448 OP , 1 month ago

SCOTUS has not yet decided that a password in your brain is protected by the fifth.

Your phone is protected by the fifth.

Until SCOTUS decides that passwords are protected by the fifth, you can be held in contempt of court by a judge indefinitely because you forgot the password (theoretical scenario, has not yet happened).

Glass0448 OP , 1 month ago

I take issue with the statement "passwords are protected by the fifth amendment".

SCOTUS is not guaranteed to affirm that above statement.

Glass0448 OP , 1 month ago

It makes them more money. And most of their customers couldn't even explain how their engine works. And if the customer had an actual choice they would have purchased a more expensive car without this tracking.

Glass0448 OP , 1 month ago

Maybe the insurance cooperatives might. And then the private ones might alter strategies to compete.

Glass0448 OP , 1 month ago

Here’s a “funny” story. Back in the day I was working (IT) for insurance companies. I’ve pitched an idea to one of the larges companies about a device connected to an OBD port to track a driver’s habits and adjust premiums based on that. I was turned down, but I heard from an unofficial source that the company was already testing such a device. That was 15 years ago.

Privacy regulations? They don't know how to handle all the data? They realized they'd have to triple rates based on the actual data they were receiving?

Glass0448 OP , 1 month ago

Your phone isn't trackable? You avoided all the license plate scanners? Your work/home has a higher rate of accidents between them?

Glass0448 OP , 1 month ago

It is a civilized world. All autonomous worker drones are using 94% of cognitive resources just justifying maintenance resources. And the ones who accidentally got better CPUs are too small in population to matter.

Glass0448 OP , 1 month ago

That's ok. Most won't do so. And if you have a "malfunctioning" module, then you probably aren't maintaining your car properly, so rates will have to be adjusted accordingly.

Glass0448 OP , 1 month ago

They have those cars. You're not rich enough.

Glass0448 OP , 1 month ago

I haven't heard the alternative candidates talk about how they'll fight for our privacy.

Glass0448 , 1 month ago

Because up to now it's still a site where you can go talk to actual people. This value was preserved not intentionally it seems.

Lets see how that holds up if half the people are AI bots now.

Glass0448 , 1 month ago

Garmin watch will track you with it's own GPS and doesn't need to sync with a phone.

Glass0448 , 1 month ago

Idk… you being forced to use your body against your will to reveal secret and private things sounds pretty awful to me

Hopefully it gets overturned and your compulsion to stick your finger on the devices requires a warrant.

I'm in partial agreement with @gomp, they should be allowed to take your fingerprint and then apply that fingerprint to a device. Or get a warrant to make you stick you finger on the device. Recording your fingerprint is just collecting data to investigate a crime, it generates a record. Sticking your finger on a device is making you participate in the investigation, and generates no investigative record other than "device did/didn't unlock".

Glass0448 , 1 month ago

For iphone brothers and sisters (courtsey of rpcameron)

You must be using an Android device. On the iPhone, 5 quick presses of the side/power button (or long-pressing power+volume) will bring up the Power Off/SOS menu; any future attempt to unlock will require the passcode. (Either action can be down without any screen interaction, meaning that you can enable this feature silently as soon as you feel it necessary.)

(Also to note for iPhones: if you choose a 7 digit or longer passcode, the entry field does not indicate how long the passcode is; the same is true if you choose an alphanumeric passcode.)

(Extra safety for those in the US if you are in a car, after doing the above stash your phone in the console/glove box; if it is within a sealed compartment not on your person additional cause/warrant is required to gain access to the device.)