Skip to content
linux-nerds.org

linux-nerds.org
  1. Übersicht
  2. Technology
  3. Adblockers stop publishers serving ads to (or even seeing) 1bn web users - Press Gazette

Adblockers stop publishers serving ads to (or even seeing) 1bn web users - Press Gazette

Technology
351 206 1.8k
Anmelden zum Antworten

  • E

    China's Humanoid Robot Soccer League Kicks Off with AI-Only Matches

    Technology technology
    5
    1
    10 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    39 Aufrufe
    I
    So, China made their own copycat RoboCup competition?
  • A

    OSTP Has a Choice to Make: Science or Politics?

    Technology technology
    7
    1
    30 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    44 Aufrufe
    B
    Ye I expect so, I don't like the way this author just doesn't bother explaining her points. She just states that she disagrees and says they should be left to their own rules. Which is probably fine, but that's just lazy or she's not mentioning the difference for another reason
  • X

    Strategies to Enhance the Efficiency of Livestock Conveyor Systems

    Technology technology
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    15 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • rmdebarc_5@sh.itjust.worksR

    Trump Mobile launches $47 service and a gold phone

    Technology technology
    129
    1
    357 Stimmen
    129 Beiträge
    581 Aufrufe
    S
    Why mention it? Because the media has a DUTY to call out a corrupt government! Because they're not doing their job!
  • D

    Dyson Has Killed Its Bizarre Zone Air-Purifying Headphones

    Technology technology
    45
    1
    226 Stimmen
    45 Beiträge
    210 Aufrufe
    rob_t_firefly@lemmy.worldR
    I have been chuckling like a dork at this particular patent since such things first became searchable online, and have never found any evidence of it being manufactured and marketed at all. The "non-adhesive adherence" is illustrated in the diagrams on the patent which you can see at the link. The inventor proposes "a facing of fluffy fibrous material" to provide the filtration and the adherence; basically this thing is the softer side of a velcro strip, bent in half with the fluff facing outward so it sticks to the inside of your buttcrack to hold itself in place in front of your anus and filter your farts through it.
  • tal@lemmy.todayT

    Catbox.moe got screwed 😿

    Technology technology
    40
    55 Stimmen
    40 Beiträge
    257 Aufrufe
    archrecord@lemm.eeA
    I'll gladly give you a reason. I'm actually happy to articulate my stance on this, considering how much I tend to care about digital rights. Services that host files should not be held responsible for what users upload, unless: The service explicitly caters to illegal content by definition or practice (i.e. the if the website is literally titled uploadyourcsamhere[.]com then it's safe to assume they deliberately want to host illegal content) The service has a very easy mechanism to remove illegal content, either when asked, or through simple monitoring systems, but chooses not to do so (catbox does this, and quite quickly too) Because holding services responsible creates a whole host of negative effects. Here's some examples: Someone starts a CDN and some users upload CSAM. The creator of the CDN goes to jail now. Nobody ever wants to create a CDN because of the legal risk, and thus the only providers of CDNs become shady, expensive, anonymously-run services with no compliance mechanisms. You run a site that hosts images, and someone decides they want to harm you. They upload CSAM, then report the site to law enforcement. You go to jail. Anybody in the future who wants to run an image sharing site must now self-censor to try and not upset any human being that could be willing to harm them via their site. A social media site is hosting the posts and content of users. In order to be compliant and not go to jail, they must engage in extremely strict filtering, otherwise even one mistake could land them in jail. All users of the site are prohibited from posting any NSFW or even suggestive content, (including newsworthy media, such as an image of bodies in a warzone) and any violation leads to an instant ban, because any of those things could lead to a chance of actually illegal content being attached. This isn't just my opinion either. Digital rights organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation have talked at length about similar policies before. To quote them: "When social media platforms adopt heavy-handed moderation policies, the unintended consequences can be hard to predict. For example, Twitter’s policies on sexual material have resulted in posts on sexual health and condoms being taken down. YouTube’s bans on violent content have resulted in journalism on the Syrian war being pulled from the site. It can be tempting to attempt to “fix” certain attitudes and behaviors online by placing increased restrictions on users’ speech, but in practice, web platforms have had more success at silencing innocent people than at making online communities healthier." Now, to address the rest of your comment, since I don't just want to focus on the beginning: I think you have to actively moderate what is uploaded Catbox does, and as previously mentioned, often at a much higher rate than other services, and at a comparable rate to many services that have millions, if not billions of dollars in annual profits that could otherwise be spent on further moderation. there has to be swifter and stricter punishment for those that do upload things that are against TOS and/or illegal. The problem isn't necessarily the speed at which people can be reported and punished, but rather that the internet is fundamentally harder to track people on than real life. It's easy for cops to sit around at a spot they know someone will be physically distributing illegal content at in real life, but digitally, even if you can see the feed of all the information passing through the service, a VPN or Tor connection will anonymize your IP address in a manner that most police departments won't be able to track, and most three-letter agencies will simply have a relatively low success rate with. There's no good solution to this problem of identifying perpetrators, which is why platforms often focus on moderation over legal enforcement actions against users so frequently. It accomplishes the goal of preventing and removing the content without having to, for example, require every single user of the internet to scan an ID (and also magically prevent people from just stealing other people's access tokens and impersonating their ID) I do agree, however, that we should probably provide larger amounts of funding, training, and resources, to divisions who's sole goal is to go after online distribution of various illegal content, primarily that which harms children, because it's certainly still an issue of there being too many reports to go through, even if many of them will still lead to dead ends. I hope that explains why making file hosting services liable for user uploaded content probably isn't the best strategy. I hate to see people with good intentions support ideas that sound good in practice, but in the end just cause more untold harms, and I hope you can understand why I believe this to be the case.
  • P

    T-Mobile secretly records iPhone screens and claims it's being helpful.

    Technology technology
    81
    1
    478 Stimmen
    81 Beiträge
    381 Aufrufe
    douglasg14b@lemmy.worldD
    Did I say that it did? No? Then why the rhetorical question for something that I never stated? Now that we're past that, I'm not sure if I think it's okay, but I at least recognize that it's normalized within society. And has been for like 70+ years now. The problem happens with how the data is used, and particularly abused. If you walk into my store, you expect that I am monitoring you. You expect that you are on camera and that your shopping patterns, like all foot traffic, are probably being analyzed and aggregated. What you buy is tracked, at least in aggregate, by default really, that's just volume tracking and prediction. Suffice to say that broad customer behavior analysis has been a thing for a couple generations now, at least. When you go to a website, why would you think that it is not keeping track of where you go and what you click on in the same manner? Now that I've stated that I do want to say that the real problems that we experience come in with how this data is misused out of what it's scope should be. And that we should have strong regulatory agencies forcing compliance of how this data is used and enforcing the right to privacy for people that want it removed.
  • P

    Business Insider is tracking employees’ ChatGPT usage as part of a new AI push: An enterprise version of ChatGPT is now available to all staff, with 70% using the tool “regularly.”

    Technology technology
    3
    1 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    29 Aufrufe
    B
    They’re trash because the entire rag is right-wing billionaire propaganda by design.