Skip to content

“Piracy is Piracy” – Disney and Universal team up to sue Midjourney

Technology
68 40 49
  • 14 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    lupusblackfur@lemmy.worldL
    Welp, queue up some more multi-million dollar "donations" to have these cases dropped... Not like the TechBros don't have the funds. ‍️ ‍️
  • We caught 4 states sharing personal health data with Big Tech

    Technology technology
    12
    1
    327 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    30 Aufrufe
    M
    Can these types of post include countries in the title? This USA defaultism makes the experience worse for everyone else with no benefit whatsoever
  • It is OutfinityGift project better then all NFTs?

    Technology technology
    1
    2
    1 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    8 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 782 Stimmen
    231 Beiträge
    103 Aufrufe
    D
    Haha I'm kidding, it's good that you share your solution here.
  • Meta Filed a Lawsuit Against The Entity Behind CrushAI Nudify App.

    Technology technology
    21
    1
    92 Stimmen
    21 Beiträge
    32 Aufrufe
    L
    I know everybody hates AI but to me it's weird to treat artificially generated nudity differently from if somebody painted a naked body with a real person's face on it - which I assume would be legally protected freedom of expression.
  • You probably don't remember these but I have a question

    Technology technology
    52
    2
    96 Stimmen
    52 Beiträge
    48 Aufrufe
    lordwiggle@lemmy.worldL
    Priorities man, priorities
  • 462 Stimmen
    94 Beiträge
    52 Aufrufe
    L
    Make them publishers or whatever is required to have it be a legal requirement, have them ban people who share false information. The law doesn't magically make open discussions not open. By design, social media is open. If discussion from the public is closed, then it's no longer social media. ban people who share false information Banning people doesn't stop falsehoods. It's a broken solution promoting a false assurance. Authorities are still fallible & risk banning over unpopular/debatable expressions that may turn out true. There was unpopular dissent over covid lockdown policies in the US despite some dramatic differences with EU policies. Pro-palestinian protests get cracked down. Authorities are vulnerable to biases & swayed. Moreover, when people can just share their falsehoods offline, attempting to ban them online is hard to justify. If print media, through its decline, is being held legally responsible Print media is a controlled medium that controls it writers & approves everything before printing. It has a prepared, coordinated message. They can & do print books full of falsehoods if they want. Social media is open communication where anyone in the entire public can freely post anything before it is revoked. They aren't claiming to spread the truth, merely to enable communication.
  • 1 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    15 Aufrufe
    L
    I think the principle could be applied to scan outside of the machine. It is making requests to 127.0.0.1:{port} - effectively using your computer as a "server" in a sort of reverse-SSRF attack. There's no reason it can't make requests to 10.10.10.1:{port} as well. Of course you'd need to guess the netmask of the network address range first, but this isn't that hard. In fact, if you consider that at least as far as the desktop site goes, most people will be browsing the web behind a standard consumer router left on defaults where it will be the first device in the DHCP range (e.g. 192.168.0.1 or 10.10.10.1), which tends to have a web UI on the LAN interface (port 8080, 80 or 443), then you'd only realistically need to scan a few addresses to determine the network address range. If you want to keep noise even lower, using just 192.168.0.1:80 and 192.168.1.1:80 I'd wager would cover 99% of consumer routers. From there you could assume that it's a /24 netmask and scan IPs to your heart's content. You could do top 10 most common ports type scans and go in-depth on anything you get a result on. I haven't tested this, but I don't see why it wouldn't work, when I was testing 13ft.io - a self-hosted 12ft.io paywall remover, an SSRF flaw like this absolutely let you perform any network request to any LAN address in range.