5 ms·

This is so naive. Big tech would be the first to get various exceptions to train their greedy AIs. They would lobby so hard to lock down personal computers, jus

This is so naive. Big tech would be the first to get various exceptions to train their greedy AIs. They would lobby so hard to lock down personal computers, just to make sure you are not tampering with your digital passport. Google would finally have their wet dream of locked down PCs that have no adblock. Politicians would be salivating at the idea of getting the real identities of dissenters, and religious fucks would finally have their way of banning porn and contraceptives.

gjsman-1000 1y ago
You're assuming this isn't already in the works; I simply see it as we can make the standard now, or let the standard be dictated. We're already seeing it piecemeal, with Cloudflare supporting skipping CAPTCHAs on verified iOS and macOS devices; mobile driver's license enrollment options on iOS; age verification rollouts for websites with no-doubt people thinking how to streamline things; etc. I personally think we are one big cyberattack from the whole concept returning fast. One big cyberattack from governments (and people in general) saying they've had enough of the free-for-all status quo. This isn't a good place to be.
- 63stack 1y ago
  I'm aware that this might very well be "in the works", what's your point with that? Who is this "we" you are talking about? Are you going to publish a repository on github about what you believe is the ethical way to do this, and you expect Google to follow, or ??? What is this "one big cyberattack away" that you are talking about? Large sites get hacked all the time, and _nobody_ in power gives a single flying fuck. There are zero people held responsible for storing passwords in plaintext, or the admin password set to "123456" or passwords left as the default. Seriously, what are you talking about?
- const_cast 1y ago
  > You're assuming this isn't already in the works; I simply see it as we can make the standard now, or let the standard be dictated. The difference is we've grandfathered in a lot of older technology - x86, old desktop operating systems like Windows and Linux, old browsers, BIOS, etc. So the existing tools we have for censorship have to work around these existing platforms. These platforms were created in a time where user control was paramount and security was an afterthought. They often do not have the mechanisms required to lock down the boot loader 100% of the time, or give a verified boot chain, or make sure the display signal isn't being intercepted. Our DRM and censorship, then, is very limited. I mean, even with secure boot - I can just turn that off. I can just turn on legacy MBR BIOS mode too. What now? On other, newer, platforms, like your smartphone or smart TV, you'll notice the DRM is much stronger. Try changing out your OS on an iPhone. These platforms are ripe for the picking when it comes to censorship you can't circumvent. So long as these older platforms exist, the usecases must be supported. Sure, we can "streamline" things on DRM heavy platforms like iOS - but we need to keep a trapdoor. Who is going to alienate Windows? Or x86 as a whole?

gjsman-1000 1y ago

You're assuming this isn't already in the works; I simply see it as we can make the standard now, or let the standard be dictated. We're already seeing it piecemeal, with Cloudflare supporting skipping CAPTCHAs on verified iOS and macOS devices; mobile driver's license enrollment options on iOS; age verification rollouts for websites with no-doubt people thinking how to streamline things; etc. I personally think we are one big cyberattack from the whole concept returning fast. One big cyberattack from governments (and people in general) saying they've had enough of the free-for-all status quo. This isn't a good place to be.

63stack 1y ago
I'm aware that this might very well be "in the works", what's your point with that? Who is this "we" you are talking about? Are you going to publish a repository on github about what you believe is the ethical way to do this, and you expect Google to follow, or ??? What is this "one big cyberattack away" that you are talking about? Large sites get hacked all the time, and _nobody_ in power gives a single flying fuck. There are zero people held responsible for storing passwords in plaintext, or the admin password set to "123456" or passwords left as the default. Seriously, what are you talking about?
const_cast 1y ago
> You're assuming this isn't already in the works; I simply see it as we can make the standard now, or let the standard be dictated. The difference is we've grandfathered in a lot of older technology - x86, old desktop operating systems like Windows and Linux, old browsers, BIOS, etc. So the existing tools we have for censorship have to work around these existing platforms. These platforms were created in a time where user control was paramount and security was an afterthought. They often do not have the mechanisms required to lock down the boot loader 100% of the time, or give a verified boot chain, or make sure the display signal isn't being intercepted. Our DRM and censorship, then, is very limited. I mean, even with secure boot - I can just turn that off. I can just turn on legacy MBR BIOS mode too. What now? On other, newer, platforms, like your smartphone or smart TV, you'll notice the DRM is much stronger. Try changing out your OS on an iPhone. These platforms are ripe for the picking when it comes to censorship you can't circumvent. So long as these older platforms exist, the usecases must be supported. Sure, we can "streamline" things on DRM heavy platforms like iOS - but we need to keep a trapdoor. Who is going to alienate Windows? Or x86 as a whole?