Mtn Dew Raid Q&A [pdf] | Hacker News Reader

Mtn Dew Raid Q&A [pdf]

mountaindew.com

256 pointskatrinarodri168 comments

ZachBussey (a popular streamer in the category of streamer news) listed the issues wrong with this campaign on Reddit.

Notably the false positive rates and the fact that the method used is basically spam, except Twitch got paid to allow it.

https://www.reddit.com/r/LivestreamFail/comments/188of4y/com...

Any other bots doing what the mtn dew bot is doing would likely catch a sitewide ban..

E: There's a more structured argument on X, with screenshots of the bot's messaging too https://twitter.com/zachbussey/status/1730742056899805377

Is there anything at all interesting or controversial about paying to have more access to a provider’s services? It’s basically the businesses model for everything for all of time.

nothing interesting or controversial at the conceptual level. This one strikes a lot of people as distasteful with respect to implementation.

Interesting or noteworthy is up to the observer.

Well it bypasses Twitch's ad-free offering Turbo, it doesn't pay the content creators in any way, and any other bot doing this sort of thing would catch a sitewide ban for spamming pretty rapidly.

Imagine Google was taking payments to allow mail to bypass Gmail's spam filters, along those lines.

Google is paid to insert spam into email, it sounds analagous

Oh god let's not get too deep into the "it's actually like" that happens with every analogy used on the internet, haha

Twitch already has adverts and banners, which are closer to what you're comparing to. This would be injecting text ads into the middle of your emails if we're correcting our analogies

E: Unless you mean Google actually does allow companies to pay to bypass spam filters? That's probably something that needs posting to HN itself if so lol

Yes, Google displays ads in the "Promotions" tab that look like emails. It's not really "bypassing the spam filter" per se, but it's arguably much better than that.

So you are complaining about the design of their ad banner. It really is NOT the same thing as allowing people to bypass spam. They don't accumulate in your inbox like unfilted spam does. They are not serviced if you use other systems to interact with your inbox.

The entire premise of this discussion is people complaining about the design of the ads, whether in a banner, sponsored content, product placement, or masquerading as emails.

> They don't accumulate in your inbox like unfilted spam does. They are not serviced if you use other systems to interact with your inbox.

These are interesting observations, but it's all still ads.

That's a good point. I was simply trying to clarify what the original commenter meant—I don't really have much of a horse in the race myself. I think the gmail ads are probably worse than spam in some ways and better than others. Like you say, they don't accumulate, and they're limited to the web client. But they're also based on much more detailed targeting and real-time bidding data that spam emails don't have access to—which ultimately might be much more harmful to privacy overall.

I said in the middle of emails, not

Remember to grab a nice refreshing coke when you're in the store today! Mmmhmm, can't get enough of an ice cold coke!

between emails!

Why do you care what goes on in the promotions tab? It's just a second spam box

I was thinking of when google literally injected ads into email messages, iirc based on the content of the email. But the more generalized dark pattern of making ads look like content (in this case, emails) is a good point, too.

I don't remember that ever happening...

Companies are probing the boundaries of what is and isn’t acceptable for AI. Sports illustrated recently used AI generated avatars to publish AI written articles as if they were written by real people. They didn’t announce it they just did it and got caught. ESPN took a TNT video from several years ago and used AI to fabricate key details and appear as if it was under the ESPN brand. They didn’t announce it they just did it and got caught.

While this particular usage is less about a specific AI act and yes buying increased access on social media (where most users naively assume fair access) isnt new - I personally and fucking terrified of where we’ll be at just a year from now.

[1]: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/economy/sports-illustrated-...

[2]: https://www.jsonline.com/story/sports/nba/bucks/2023/10/28/e...

Spamming advertising in chat is a bannable offense. Chat is a space free of ads, because there is no way to opt out without closing chat, and if I do that, I have literally no reason to watch the streamer on Twitch, since I can probably catch their VOD on YouTube the next day. If I want to watch the streamer on Twitch ad free, I subscribe, which kicks 50% or 30% over to Twitch to pay to keep the lights on. The comments by this bot announcing this campaign probably got it flagged to Twitch by thousands of viewers and banned in thousands of channels, because it's the same behavior seen by other bots trying to entice you with "free gaming gear" or "hot singles in your area".

The AI scanning as part of this campaign is happening whether someone opts in or not. And what the streamer opts into is nothing more than being used as an advertising vessel for bad sugar water for free.

Pepsico is free to issue Twitch bounties for certain things or buy normal ad slots for pre-rolls or mid-stream ads if they want to remind everyone that their neon green slop exists.

> Spamming advertising in chat [without paying Twitch] is a bannable offense.

The reason the rule exists is because you don't get to advertise on Twitch without paying them, but they're paying them so :/

That sounds inconvenient for you, but it doesn’t sound controversial.

I guess it shows who's really in power. Which shouldn't really come as a surprise to anyone, but keeps tripping people up.

Same way that people keep forgetting youtube videos aren't free or public, or that social media have no obligation to be impartial or protect freedom of spreech.

So my question is who writes this code for them?

Like I'm way more fascinated by the corporate structure - presumably it's not someone working at Pepsi that comes up with this. So did some third party build it then pitch Pepsi's marketing?

How did this come about?

B2B team at OpenAI? :-)

why not? Pepsi is basically a marketing company as they're not exactly developing new space faring vehicles, or new flavors, even

Ad company Unit9 going by an AdAge article.

https://adage.com/article/digital-marketing-ad-tech-news/mtn...

(Archive: https://archive.ph/NGrwn)

Also notable is that Doritos recently did an AI advert that removes the crunch sounds in streams and voice comms. Maybe someone in PepsiCo marketing is on a bit of an AI kick :)

Very cool, thank you!

Entirely different kind of company that I've never thought about before.

My first job out of college was at an ad agency. The level 1 playbook of all agencies is to find the "hot new things" in the zeitgeist and figure out how to turn it into advertising.

That aspect of it is hardly interesting or unusual. “Company hires ad agency to develop / execute campaign”, and “ad agency either has in-house, or outsources, implementation” is just…how things work. It just happens that for this campaign, among the many professionals required, one of them had to write code.

It will be interesting to see whether the AI recognizes olde timey mountain dew logos, and whether or not it recognizes a "DO NOT DRINK THIS" sign above a mountain dew logo. I suppose no publicity is bad publicity, so they probably don't care.

As well as obvious bait like the attached, it's also reacting a lot to false positives, going into channels that don't even have a camera on or any green at all on the screen

https://twitter.com/_Yarts_/status/1731083331893391683?ref=t...

That was my first thought as well. Maybe it reads all text but will it know if I have a Hitler head drinking MD in the background? I can get pretty obscure with dictators such that the AI isn’t likely to be able to detect what I put out there.

Or the Mtn. Dew renaming campaign back in the 00s where 4chan stuffed the ballot boxes with a rather offensive name

This reminds me of something I noticed on this year's "Summer of Baja Blast" promotion - to make an entry, all you had to do was take a picture of a bottle with your phone - it wasn't scanning any barcodes or QR codes. I thought this was a bit strange (and possibly open to cheating by reusing bottles, although there was a limit of one entry per day). Maybe this was a scheme to get image training data?

Why would you reuse a bottle instead of just having a nice refreshing drink of an ice cold Baja Blast?

>Are there any prizes or perks for participating in MTN DEW RAID?

>Definitely! Participating streamers will have the chance to be featured on the MTN DEW Gaming Twitch Channel, the MTN DEW RAID branded shelf on the Twitch home page, and the Twitch homepage hero carousel. Streamers will also have a chance to receive a 1:1 coaching session with a professional streamer/content creator

If you volunteer to advertise their product, you have a chance to win exposure on mountain dew's twitch gaming channel, which nobody should care about. They're not even paying you. This is for people who sell out before they even see a dollar.

Since it seems like you don’t understand how streaming on twitch works, here’s the tl;dr. They’re paying you in exposure for giving them exposure. This is one of the few places where “for the exposure” is actually meaningful and not a meme. If you’re trying to get a channel off the ground as a career, this is not a terrible deal.

If entering to win into a contest that may maybe get you exposure on mountain dew's 15k subscriber channel is what you call "getting a channel off the ground" you've already lost. It's a terrible deal. If you feature brands on your channel get paid for it, or stop doing it. Doing it for a chance to win exposure on a 15k sub channel, none of whom are there to watch you because thats not why they subbed to it, is selling out for nothing. Less than nothing. A chance at nothing, with nothing guaranteed.

You’re thinking about this backwards. These are streamers with nothing to offer trying to hit the virality lottery. 15k viewers is more than enough for that spark to catch. Also, if you sub to a brand channel finding small streamers is a big part of why.

Would it be good to get paid for it? Sure. Can streamers with no audience demand payment? Of course not.

Also, selling out isn’t a thing. It doesn’t exist. All streamers work with brands as that’s the core of the job. You’re arguing that streamers should throw away a free-to-them opportunity for your lofty ideals of How Things Should Be.

15k is the total subs to mtn dew's channel, not viewers. And the promoted channel gets a small amount of promotion in exchange for a long time of product placement.

Selling out is a thing. You put the value on your own product. If a week of advertising for them is valued at $0 and 15 minutes of promotion on a low view count channel, you've sold out for basically nothing.

Streamers should not do things that immediately devalue their channel such that their promotion is worth $0. Literally giving away the value for a chance to win promotion. Its not a lofty ideal its setting your own value above $0.

The exposure is a chance at one of the 15 minute slots on Twitch homepage in exchange for up to 6 days of displaying a mtn dew logo on their stream (the longer it's displayed, the more chance they have at these limited slots)

Even if a person does win a slot they'll have to be live to use it during the prize portion of the campaign. Factoring in timezones this brings the slots available down a fair bit unless the streamer decides to do a 36 hour stream.

Even if they win one it'll bring concurrent viewers aye, but these are viewers that just happen to be visiting the homepage, not looking to watch streams from the carousel. They're mostly empty embedded views.

Of the people looking at the homepage almost none of them will click through to the stream as they're doing something else like looking for their favourite streamer or en-route to their settings or something like that. Of those people that do click through, a lot of them are going to be trolls looking to wind streamers up or otherwise harass them.

There may still be a handful of viewers left that do click through to the stream, who don't speedrun getting banned from the stream, who do watch the stream. Chances are though even those people will be leaving for the next thing to watch quickly unless the streamer has something super entertaining going on. In that very specific scenario, aye this might be an ok deal.

For anyone else this is a tiny chance at 15 minutes of stress before dropping back to their usual view count.

tl;dr nah it's pretty much the meme

I'll happily eat my words if I turn out to be wrong. I should probably eat a hearty breakfast though.

This seems really scummy, like they're trying to circumvent the FTC rules on the disclosure of paid product placements by doing this in a automated way (even with the chat message opt-in). Seems to me like the company promoting someone and sending more viewers their way (by featuring the streamer "on the MTN DEW Gaming Twitch Channel") constitutes the product placement being an "advertisement" that should be disclosed by streamers.

> to circumvent the FTC rules on the disclosure of paid product placements

Is it paid product placement if no one is getting paid?

Sounds like the only benefit is a chance at being featured in a "MTN DEW official" ad.

Unless exposure counts as payment, it doesn't seem like this would count as paid product placement. But I'm not a lawyer.

> MTN DEW RAID will be providing streamers at all levels – from casual gamers to the pros - with the chance to supe up their audiences – that’s the prize! However, in order to spread the word MTN DEW is partnering with influencers, as well as existing brand partners, to showcase the RAID program and encourage their followers to join the RAID.

Paying with exposure Wow. and wtf does "supe" even mean here?

Phonetic spelling of "Soup up" I guess.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/soup%20up

> These examples are programmatically compiled from various online sources to illustrate current usage of the word 'soup up.' Any opinions expressed in the examples do not represent those of Merriam-Webster or its editors

If you trust AI.

Basically "supercharge" but in a use not specific to the literal raising of intake manifold pressure and flow. To "supe up", also spelled "soup up" (which makes no sense to me as there's no broth involved), has been a common term in motorsports since at least the 1960s.

The term is actually soup up, supe up is incorrect. It comes from horse racing back in the 1920's, the slang for performance enhancing drugs given to your horses was soup.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/soup%20up#word-hi...

> and wtf does "supe" even mean here?

Perhaps it's a common expression in "Puerta Rico":

> While MTN DEW RAID is live, anyone streaming under the “Games” category on Twitch that is +18 years old (19+ in AL & NE), actively live streaming, based in the USA, Puerta Rico, or Guam, and has MTN DEW visible on camera is eligible to participate.

It's an Albany expression.

I really love my steamed hams

Also, what exposure?

Is anyone here thinking, "you know what, I need to hop onto the official Mountain Dew Twitch channel so I can see exactly 10 minutes of a 6 simultaneous streams, chosen randomly with the only similarity between them being that a beverage is visible in each stream. That is definitely the way I'm going to find my new favorite streamer."?

I can't imagine that this is an effective way for a streamer to get discovered by an audience.

And yet here we are talking about Mountain Dew.

Name recognition/publicity definitely matters for tiny companies, but I don't think "all press is good press" holds true for giant companies. Every single person on HN knows that Mountain Dew exists, they're past the point of needing brand recognition.

My suspicion is that after a certain threshold of recognition, I think it starts to matter whether the people talking about a company are talking positively or are trashing it.

I hope this ends with something similar to the time they "let the fans decide" on a name for their new flavor.

This is an interesting method to advertise. I can’t say I like it or hate it but certainly, it’s better that advertisers are being more proactive.

The timing was terrible for me lol.

All the ads on Twitch had pushed me into paying for Turbo.. and now they're advertising in chat and embedded in people's streams

This is why I won't pay for youtube premium. It only removes part of the ads.

Which ones doesn't it remove?

The ones put in by the content creators themselves.

Because that's not YouTube's ad?

Any opportunity to plug SponsorBlock: https://sponsor.ajay.app/

You mean the ones you can easily fast forward through?

It removes all of the YouTube ads. If you don’t like ads embedded in videos, don’t watch videos from creators who take sponsorships.

>If you don’t like ads embedded in videos, don’t watch videos from creators who take sponsorships.

Or just use SponsorBlock?

...for now. Once adoption of YouTube Premium flatlines, they'll introduce "limited ads" and a higher tier YouTube Ultra to remove them.

J, K, and L are keyboard shortcuts for "skip back 10s", "toggle pause", and "skip forward 10s". Left and right arrow keys do the same skipping. On mobile a double tap on either side of the screen again skips forward/back. A double tap with two fingers skips a chapter. Makes hopping around in a video a breeze.

> it’s better that advertisers are being more proactive.

Is it? Why?

Clever use of opencv and image detection.

Now they should add the option for viewers to opt in to this and the streamer can give them channel points (or whatever) every time the viewer drinks a mtn dew can in front of their camera (verified by the AI)! The AI will also randomly occasionally select a viewer's clip of them drinking a can to show on stream in a small-ish box on the side similar to the automated reading of donation comments!

(this is sarcastic, but it's also the next logical step for this kind of marketing)

Is this a joke? It is pretty much exactly the old "please drink verification can" greentext / meme

I suppose life really does imitate art!

Oh how I wish today was April 1st. Instead, seems like this is real and we indeed live in a clown world.

What’s stopping me from having a “MTN DEW makes you obese” banner on my channel?

Nothing, but it says they have humans verifying the streams' content too, so presumably they would not choose to include you in the promotion.

..moooore like Pepsico lawyers would send you some nice fan mail with a C&D.

I'm pretty sure that such a banner would be squarely protected by the First Amendment as long as you didn't make it look like you were sponsored by Pepsi.

Crowd fund a popular "family vlogger" (maybe one who does more DIY type projects) to make an episode where they clean a bunch of motor oil, grease, and brake fluid off their driveway with MTN DEW. "Wow, it's so good at penetrating the cement and breaking down that toxic sludge!"

Ozempic couldn’t have come along at a better time.

> Will the RAID AI crawl a stream without the streamer’s permission?

> The MTN DEW RAID AI will begin crawling all concurrent Gaming livestreams from December 1 - December 8, but that doesn’t mean the AI is watching your streams or keeping any data.

What the #$&@X are you talking about? If an image-recognition algorithm is crawling livestreams and verifying objects inside of them, that does mean you are watching the streams and keeping data. This is not how words work, you can't just change definitions like this, you are writing a FAQ not a post-modernist art essay.

Mountain Dew is watching the stream and is keeping data: at the very least it's storing data about which streams had Mountain Dew in them and which streamers have opted in and out. And all of that data processing is happening serverside so I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say there's probably other metadata being preserved too. And sure, streams are public and Mountain Dew can crawl them and they could have given an answer of "yes, we are, they're public". But how little do you have to think of your target audience to instead decide to give an answer that is this blatantly a lie and to think that it will fool people?

I am going to sneak into the house of whatever advertiser wrote this and put spiders in their bed. But that doesn't mean I'll be trespassing, because apparently words mean nothing at all and I can say anything I want.

They are using intentionally misleading terms to obfuscate something they don't want to bother explaining and if they did explain it, non-tech users wouldn't get it.

I have a bag of Brown Recluse spiders I was going to throw at the ceiling fan during Christmas dinner to liven things up a bit, but I think you're idea is a better use case.

>This is not how words work, you can't just change definitions like this, you are writing a FAQ not a post-modernist art essay.

You're assuming this FAQ wasn't written by an AI also.

<j>I don't know, I think only a real human advertiser would have the required lack of shame or self-awareness necessary to tell streamers that instead of being compensated, they were instead going to be given the opportunity to "supe" their viewers. We have to assume that even jailbroken ChatGPT would still have refused to write something quite that cringey.</j>

I interpreted that as "pulling a list of all streams, then comparing it to the list of participants, and watching only those".

They could certainly be more clear about it.

I understand why you would think that streamers were actively opting in before their streams were scanned, because you're probably a normal human being and you're probably having a normal human reaction like, "obviously streamers just sign up, how else would you even design a program like this? It's not complicated, you just put a form online."

But that would be the sensible way to do it.

In actuality the way they determine the participants is by doing object recognition on everyone's streams to try and figure out if a stream is already displaying Mountain Dew, and if it is then the bot sends spam messages to the streamers to ask them if they want to participate, and the only way streamers can opt out of all of that is "don't stream in the games category."

mountain dew advertising is a post-modern art essay.

> you can't just change definitions like this

Of course you can, don’t be obtuse. Words can literally mean anything the speaker wants them to, language evolves.

This whole conversation is weird and unhinged. We’re talking about streams which are deliberately created to be public. From that perspective, if they’re not storing it the details about the stream then their target audience would agree that they’re not watching and storing data. This question is asking if the AI (ugh) is skynet (ugh) and is learning about streaming, and then saying “nope, just looking for a logo”.

Nobody cares about this “well actually” about metadata. English is a terrible medium for communicating technical information, and it’s doubly bad when the target audience neither knows nor cares about technical details.

> language evolves

Language evolves organically through public usage, not via soda FAQs. If you asked pretty much anyone on the street in any context "an AI is going to scan a video and locate on object, is it 'watching' the video" -- they would say yes. This is not a niche interpretation of what it means to watch a video. The visual data from the video output is being piped into an image recognition engine; the vast majority of the general public would call that "watching".

Maybe in the future that will change, but unless Mountain Dew has a time machine hidden in their office, "language evolves" is not an excuse.

> if they’re not storing it the details about the stream then their target audience would agree that they’re not watching and storing data.

They are storing details about the stream, they have to or else the system doesn't work. They have to store information about which streams they've checked, haven't checked, which streams have opted in, which streams have opted out, when they last messaged the stream or spammed in chat. The FAQ also implies that they are storing frequency information about how often the logo appears, so it's not even accurate to say they're not storing data that relates to the actual contents of the stream.

That's not nitpicking, it's not a technicality, we're not debating whether or not a proxy service counts as storage or talking about where data is at rest. They are just straight up lying -- there is stream and content metadata being stored on their servers and being used for the project.

> and it’s doubly bad when the target audience neither knows nor cares about technical details.

"Are you storing information about me"

"None that you would understand"

is a terrible answer for a FAQ and belittles the reader. The streams are intended to be public, they could just say, "yes we are scanning public streams and collecting metadata." People know what metadata is, it's not that complicated. There are so many simple answers they could give to this question that would be honest to what they're doing without risking confusion.

"The public would be confused" is not an excuse to outright lie about what information a company is and isn't storing. Obviously it's not an excuse, this is Facebook levels of weirdness to suggest, to say "the public doesn't understand what we're storing so we don't have to inform them about it."

> This is not a niche interpretation of what it means to watch a video

You should be aware that is very much up for debate. I have seen lots of market research on words around AI, and there is a large group of people who think that it is impossible to use human verbs like “watch” in the context of AI. Computer programs can’t watch things any more than you can be overclocked; the word simply doesn’t apply.

Your examples of storing data about streams are similarly confused about how people use language. That’s not data on streams, it’s data on channels. There’s no reason for them to store data on streams.

Whether the can appeared has nothing to do with the content of the stream. The content is whatever activity is happening, not some irrelevant prop detail that has nothing to do with the content.

Save your outrage for something that’s worth it, this is a nothing burger.

> and there is a large group of people who think that it is impossible to use human verbs like “watch” in the context of AI

Oh come on, you're reaching here. If the intention was to make a commentary on the personhood of AI, the FAQ would not have said, "the AI isn't watching your video", it would have said, "the AI lacks the ability to perceive reality in human terms."

I think we both know that an advertiser was not sitting down to write this thinking, "wait, holy crud the AI isn't watching the video... because it can't watch anything". Keep in mind the context that this is a corporate FAQ about an advertising campaign, not a philosophical essay about AI personhood.

> That’s not data on streams, it’s data on channels. [...] Whether the can appeared has nothing to do with the content of the stream.

What on earth are you talking about?

The visible content in the video stream is not the content in the stream because it's not important enough to the overall content of the stream, so that means this is all data on channels, even though the data is specifically relevant to individual streams and not to channels and even though all of the communication between the bot and the streamer is happening through the individual stream and not through the channel, and even though all of the policies are per-stream and not per-channel. Do I understand that correctly?

This is absurd.

> Save your outrage

I guess speaking of ambiguity of language on HN I should clarify that I'm not outraged at Mountain Dew, I'm mocking the company. I agree this is not a big issue largely because the advertising campaign itself is pathetic and meaningless and is probably going to be largely ignored by actual streamers.

This is a campaign that in the absence of compensation is offering streamers the ability to "supe" their followers via randomly selected 10-minute clips on the Mountain Dew Twitch channel. So agreed, this is not worth taking seriously.

But while it's not worth getting outraged over the Mountain Dew company debasing itself, attempts to excuse deceptive or outright inaccurate messaging about corporate data usage based on technicalities and strained excuses about what people "understand" about privacy is all too common in the current tech landscape and it's generally good to mock the companies that try to pull that crap and to call them out as scummy.

> Once you accept, the RAID AI will keep monitoring your stream for the presence of MTN DEW, if you remove your DEW, you’ll be prompted to bring it back on camera

This has to be directly inspired by that "drink verification can" 4chan post.

I assume we are talking about this one, for those not aware: https://i.imgur.com/dgGvgKF.png

Thank you for linking that, that made me laugh out loud. That should be a scene in Idiocracy.

Change a few words and this feels exactly like the security theatre of the modern login experience, 2FA, MFA, I'm sure they're working on the next insufferable "best practice" to try tie your phone to you even more. Good luck logging into some services if you dare keep your phone in another room for a change.

Flashback to the time I was getting approximately 50 Microsoft 2FA SMS's a day. The place I worked then had forced Chrome's homepage to be some crappy SharePoint page. Getting into that required logging into our Microsoft account, and the checkbox to remember our login for five days literally never worked.

So every time I opened a new tab in Chrome, I'd get a SMS. Truly, we are living in the future.

to be fair, sounds like the place you worked at misconfigured something, rather than M$.

Tip: if you find that the "remember my login" ticks never seem to work for you, it's likely your browser's "Enhanced Tracking Prevention" or whatever. You should be able to disable it for just the domain that the authentication portal itself is happening on. Helped a lot for me.

I always wonder what would happen to most people if there was a house fire and all their phones and laptops burned at once.

It’s not clear what the best security plan for that is (safety deposit box or fireproof safe seem like the best options).

Most places will deactivate your account's 2FA if you can convincingly prove your identity. Of course hackers noticed that too, and might try to disable your 2FA once they have enough private information about you ...

So, not Google.

I tried to go phone free once. It was going well until I had to pay my car note.

I stress about getting my shit stolen every time I’m traveling and being completely locked out of everything. I stash an extra phone separate from my main phone every time I travel for that reason.

You have two phones with the same number? I didn't know that was possible.

No, but most SMS-based 2fa is linked to my voip number, which then requires 2fa stored in a password manager.

Makes sense. Thanks.

Many services let you print 2fa codes. Keep them at a friends house

The primary MFA device should be a Yubikey or something similar. Some of such keys are designed to be permanently plugged in. People use phones instead when they don't want to invest into a key or as a backup. EDIT: Or when OTP over SMS is the only MFA method supported as it likely is in your case.

Does that also work if Google again randomly decides I have to use a specific one of multiple MFA choices? Recently it forced me to dig out my old phone I hadn't been using for months and boot it just to confirm a popup because it simply wouldn't let me select a different method. I don't know what would have happened if I'd lost the phone instead of just buying a new one after support ended. It didn't even let me enter my printed out backup codes, which kind of defeats the purpose.

And most people aren't even using a free password manager, there's no chance they're going to buy and configure a Yubikey.

I once ran over my phone with a mower. Tried to log onto Verizon's site to buy a new one. Please enter the code shown on your phone. No alternative way to sign in. Nothing. I contacted chat support and they wouldn't talk to me until I verified through my phone. Obviously impossible. I ended up chatting with sales support and begging each person to forward me to tech support until one finally took pity on me and forwarded me to someone who was cool enough to actually help me. What the hell.

>The place I worked then had forced Chrome's homepage to be some crappy SharePoint page. Getting into that required logging into our Microsoft account, and the checkbox to remember our login for five days literally never worked.

Yes but, usually you are logged into your PC with the same account. So with SSO in Edge and Firefox, it would just log you in.

Except it didn’t.

Yes because Chrome does not have Azure AD Windows account SSO :)

And thanks to Sony (patent US8246454B2), this might as well be real…

https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/b4/2e/a1/779dd8d...

This never fails to make me tear up with laughter. The quadrant where he stands up just really gets me.

Isn't the greentext in direct response to that patent?

Patent was granted in 2012, greentext published in 2013. Definitely plausible.

https://patents.google.com/patent/US8246454B2/en

  -wake up feeling sick after a late night of playing video games
  -excited to play some halo 2k19
  -"xbox on"
  -...
  -"XBOX ON"
  -"Please verify that you are "annon332" by saying "Doritos™ Dew™ it right!"
  -"Doritos™ Dew™ it right"
  -"ERROR! Please drink a verification can"
  -reach into my Doritos™ Mountain Dew™ Halo 2k19™ War Chest
  -only a few cans left, needed to verify 14 times last night
  -still feeling sick from the 14
  -force it down and grumble out "mmmm that really hit the spot"
  -xbox does nothing
  -i attempt to smile
  -"Connecting to verification server"
  -...
  -"Verification complete!"
  -finally
  -boot up halo 2k19
  -finding multiplayer match...
  -"ERROR! User attempting to steal online gameplay!"
  -my mother just walked in the room
  -"Adding another user to your pass, this will be charged to your credit card. Do you accept?"
  -"NO!"
  -"Console entering lock state!"
  -"to unlock drink verification can"
  -last can
  -"WARNING, OUT OF VERIFICATION CANS, an order has been shipped and charged to your credit card"
  -drink half the can, oh god im going to be sick
  -pour the last half out the window
  -"PIRACY DETECTED! PLEASE COMPLETE THIS ADVERTISEMENT TO CONTINUE"
  -the mountain dew ad plays
  -i have to dance for it
  -feeling so sick
  -makes me sing along
  -dancing and singing
  -"mountain dew is for me and you"
  -throw up on my self
  -throw up on my tv and entertainment system
  -router shorts
  -"ERROR NO CONNECTION! XBOX SHUTTING OFF"
  -"PLEASE DRINK VERIFICATION CAN TO CONTINUE"

Text for context, source:4chan

I think they're using it as an instruction manual. Looking forward to Doritos deploying their piece.

It has become impossible to parody corporate greed because the corpos are getting greedier faster than comedians can come up with material.

Sounds like something out of Idiocracy. It's got what _____ crave!

How many years until you'll get rewarded extra of your drinking from the can? I'd say 2-3 years.

"PLEASE DRINK VERIFICATION CAN" but even more dystopian

This is an opt-in promotion they're inviting small streamers to participate in without any actual consumption required.

The dystopian part is that they're testing a CV feature that has enough capacity to watch tons of streams constantly, and they don't _need_ your permission to run it. One would hope this will put the "haha my FBI agent must be bored I'm not worth it nothing to hide :)" fools in their place

Why would they need a permission to watch something that you are publicly streaming?

Consider the difference between noticing someone you happen to pass on the street and following that person with a video camera every time they are outside. Corporation should not continuously monitor people, even in public spaces.

Everything you do online is tracked. Too late.

It's never too late to have a stance on something. Actually it's quite difficult to do things the other way around.

This isn't really a very good comparison.

It's difficult to simply live life and never, ever be in a public space.

No one has to publicly stream on Twitch or other services. If someone wants to broadcast video but do it privately, there are ways to do that.

It might be a small stage for a small streamer, but turning that stream on still means you're getting up on a stage, and you are implicitly accepting that you'll be watched. It's a choice to put yourself out there.

Yes. Related to the difference between “available” and “easily accessible” - a lot of information about e.g. politicians may be freely available, but it usually doesn’t make a difference unless a journalist makes it easily accessible.

Streamers are explicitly broadcasting themselves, though. They are the camera following themselves around.

There is a difference between watching a person in a public space and watching someone who is purposely broadcasting themself to the world

Your comment and many others like it make me wonder if you people even know what Twitch is.

Yeah they make it sound like Twitch installed hidden webcams in everyones bedroom or something...

I'm aware, I used to watch streams. Some of the comments suggest that publicly broadcast information is fair game for large scale, corporate sponsored data mining. The existence of such data mining has a chilling effect, causing people who may wish to broadcast to avoid it. Example are elsewhere in the thread.

something scary the "my FBI agent" people probably don't think about is that "their FBI agent" might not even be born yet, because they're putting all this stuff out into the public record to be analyzed who knows, maybe thirty years from now by an unimaginable regime by some "kid" (who's 30, and you're 50 or 60) that doesn't have an inkling of understanding or care for what was socially acceptable 30 years ago

Good thing the FBI isn't in the business of policing social acceptability.

We didn't think the NSA was in the business of international unwarranted surveillance until they were

You could apply that reasoning to any random claim regardless of veracity.

The AI is just automating something they could hire an army of humans to do though, twitch usually has ~80k streams running, so it would take a few thousand workers but there would be no privacy blockers.

They do have your permission to run it, as soon as you start live streaming yourself you are giving anyone with the internet permission to access that data.

I think they're playing netizens over this one, because they know this comment will come up and everyone will laugh and associate that feel-good emotion with their brand.

Is it a feel-good emotion if the emotion is "how do I get off this planet"?

Counter-proposal: Amazon should prohibit influencing soft drinks on their platform, and use their machine-vision panopticon to punish streamers who promote/advertise them to children.

Where's the profit margin in that

It's a long term play where the pay off is living and raising your children in a slightly nicer world, not expressed directly in a dollar amount.

So 0 benefit to Amazon which would typically benefit from a more consumerism-focused youth?

Amazon would benefit from future citizens that can walk without wobbling.

I'm not sure they would. I never used Amazon more than when I was unable to walk.

not really, they would benefit from people being stuck in their chairs and needing to order everything online.

Looks like you haven't watched Wall-E

In the short term maybe. More long term and generally, there are going to be 400 million people living in America, over the lifespan of Amazon the entity, the lifespans of its employees and shareholders, all three will have to interact with those 400 million people, some on the street, a lot (in a small way) in political processes and systems, in art, as future employees, as employees in businesses they partner with, etc. Advertising is mass programming (albeit in a small way) of large swathes of the population.

There's 44 million US Twitch users, so basically you can show a message to 1/10th of the entire youth population of America. In 10 years there is probably some minor difference in society between whether that message was "go drink mountain dew" or "here's how DNA works" or something simpler, or more useful, or different things tailored by age, etc. Now if Amazon makes like 3 cents per ad (a number I made up) * 44 million users compounded by 7% annual interest over 10 years then that's 2.5 million dollars of profit. But money is a tiny slice of the entire pie of what is possible in an economy. If instead Amazon "donated" that 2.5 million dollars (actually more if 3 cents per ad is profit not revenue) by using its ad infrastructure to forcefully cram useful knowledge into the children instead of knowledge about a sugar drink brand, it's possible that everything that is possible in society 10 years from now would essentially make all the other money Amazon makes more valuable, because, for example, doctors that Amazon shareholders would want to go to would charge less because they indoctrinated a few more children into an interest in biology instead of Mountain Dew consumption so there was more doctors and less diabetics.

Will it be enough to offset 2.5+ million dollars? Probably not, but we don't have the technology to express that cost/benefit calculation, because the best we have is spreadsheets and demand/supply curves (if you will permit my derisive oversimplification of what economic tools business people use). We have developed computers and mathematics, as well as a system of assigning token counts to people and groups of people (money) that when people and groups of people work hard on increasing their respective token counts seems to correlate quite well with generally improving things and getting things we want. Numbers (bits really) are highly physically stable states and mathematics is operations we can perform of those states that are themselves very stable in time and predictable. We can measure things in the world and record those measurements into bits and then apply operations on those bits and we find that sometimes we're able to build computations that result in a strong correlation between the resulting state and physical reality. We're able to predict the future. However there's still a pretty huge mismatch with what we're able to easily express with simple mathematics on collections of bits and whatever our brains can do, which we experience as intuition/common sense and empathy.

Basically I'm saying it would take a strong willed person with the intuition to see that "if we use our mass population programming tools to increase the competence of our youth we will be better off than if we increase the consumption of Mountain Dew by 13% (or whatever they estimate)" because it's very difficult to truly express that comparison as a spreadsheet of dollar amounts, which is the primary technology businesses have for making decisions. Because a spreadsheet is a Turing machine and typing in data and programs into it is really time consuming whereas a human brain is a very different type of computer that processes input much more efficiently but is more fallible because other brains can't inspect its thought process, which is why we usually prefer spreadsheets.

I think for Amazon it will come down to how they want to be perceived as a brand(and twitch was a brilliant purchase for this) - I don't think they can be too cheap/cash-iny, especially with YT as an eternal looming foe.

I wouldn't be surprised if they kill it in part because it's asynch injection/infestation into what's part of the competitive differentiation of streaming vs recorded videos - live chat.

Paid for by... The Moms Against Mountain Dew? I want to live in a world where the healthy option is the financially profitable one, but until we do, the advertisers/sugar pushers will continue to win.

Just wait for Mothers Against Generative AI

profit is not the only morality

Ehh we have enough with the nanny state, we don't need the nanny corps as well.

Ethically: yes, totally.

Too bad it's never going to happen, because selling healthy things to children is a lot harder than selling sugar water.

Yeah. Sweets are one thing when consumed moderately but Mountain Dew is toxic waste. Looks like it's radioactive and contains the appropriate ingredients.

My grandfather tried it once and said "that tastes like Daisy May's piss"

THEY MADE PLEASE DRINK VERIFICATION CAN REAL? WHAT THE FUCK

Brought to you by Carl's Jr! [0]

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQPU_BiT25w

F*** you, I'm eating!

THANK YOU FOR DRINKING YOUR VERIFICATION CAN

It's finally happened. You literally have to drink an authentication can on camera to stay in their program and get paid.

For the uninitiated this was a 4chan post from over a decade ago envisioning what the future dystopian online world would be like. In order to play future halo games you would have to watch ads, repeat slogans, and drink authentication cans of mntn dew. You can read the rest of the post here, worth it: https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/632877-halo-4/66477630

Sony has a patent for the repeat slogans part. (Say McDonalds to end commercial, fig. 9) https://patents.google.com/patent/US8246454B2/en

AI algorithms getting people to drink MTN DEW, not even Black Mirror thought of that one.

So somebody actually implemented authentication by drinking a can. That used to be a joke.

... brought to you by Carl's Jr.

This definitely has a "How do you do fellow kids" vibe to it.

https://amp.knowyourmeme.com/memes/how-do-you-do-fellow-kids

I am seeing more potential for downside than for upside for this campaign.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com