doomrobo

From your first link:

> The digital images can be converted to binary data and encrypted with Advanced Encryption Standard (AES). However, the high correlation between adjacent pixels may still be kept after encrypting a digital image without considering the property of digital images.

What do you mean by this? It sounds like it’s suggesting that, e.g., the AES-CBC ciphertext of an image has detectable internal correlations. In other words, AES is completely broken as a cipher. Surely I’m misinterpreting the claim here.

The resulting paper: https://sci-hub.st/downloads/2020-01-31/3c/10.1007@s40993-02...

Why is the Codex Seraphinianus on this list? There is no cipher, it's made up nonsense. The artist said so himself.

I can't tell from the article: is Tinder limiting to violent crimes or can you see a person's whole record? Also is it all arrests or just convictions? If it's anything more than violent convictions then this is obviously bad. Strictly violent convictions is tougher bc on one hand it might improve safety and on the other hand it's adding a flawed barrier of participation to what is increasingly becoming the only way to date.

Same issue. I contacted support and literally never got a response. Cancelled my subscription. Now I use Zotero and it's pretty good

Not in active development

https://github.com/orangeduck/Cello/issues/135

I really like using Fastmail. For raw features, it's got a contact sync, calendar sync, custom domain suppport, a snappy webmail client, push notifs (which Gmail does not support outside the official app), a robust spam filtering language, integration with 1Password that lets you make per-site masked email addresses, and a lot more.

As for security: I only care about account security, not confidentiality. As a friend said to me recently "as far as I'm concerned, emails are digital postcards". For account security, Fastmail has 2FA and revocable per-client passwords.

I don't think it's deniable. The server has an identity key (which resides in its certificate) that it uses to sign its response to the client Hello message. Though I guess if you make certificates short-lived and published the privkeys it might be close to OTR

It's named this because GitHub repos called "awesome-X" are precisely that. I forgot where the pattern originated

IANAL but I'm pretty sure this would count as destruction of evidence

I wouldn't do this just bc I've been burned by Asus customer service before. I had a faulty AC68U router (random disconnects; happened regardless of firmware) and they essentially refused to help me. I'd wait 10min on hold to speak to someone and they'd say they can do a repair but no exchange. And when I said I can't be without internet for a week bc I'm WFH, they did absolutely nothing. Never buying Asus again

This is my main issue with so many services. The reason I don't use Instagram is because Instagram gives me no control over what I see. You want to look at pictures without seeing comments? Too bad. It doesn't matter that the top comment on one of the accounts I follow was an anti-Semitic jab at the account owner, I have to read it because Instagram knows what's best for me. Ditto YouTube comments & suggestions, Twitter ordering & suggestions, TikTok ordering & suggestions, and just ads in general.

It's a catch-22 for me: if I cede control I get sucked into these addictive cycles, and if I don't cede control I miss out on the primary means of social communication for people my age. How did we get here?

This repo has a nice list of attention-respecting frontends. https://github.com/mendel5/alternative-front-ends/issues

One argument in favor of offering BOTH phone and textual ordering interfaces is accessibility. If someone is deaf or hard of hearing they might not be able to call and order, and they may not be able to find someone at the moment to do it for them

Good point I'd love to have that discussion. Advertising to children should be illegal. Does anyone know of existing bills or proposals in this direction?

Absolutely not. The reason bank interest is lower is because the FDIC ensures that you get your money if the bank stops existing. If the company backing your stablecoin stops existing, what are you left with? Nothing, of course

This not disruptive. This is just normal investing with all the risks attached

You can do some really cool cryptography if you assume your adversary has limited space. Examples include non-transferable signatures and streaming programs that stop functioning when the stream stops (repugnant as a DRM but neat as a concept)

https://eprint.iacr.org/2021/406

I think $120/yr is good. I pay $120/yr for Dropbox, which is also a service I use multiple times a day and I think it's fair.

I've been using Fastmail for years with a custom domain. I only have positive things to say

> NFTs are a scam and are retroactively obsoleted by digital signatures

I'm not one to ever defend NFTs, but this is not right. Suppose I bought an extremely trendy natural number k ∈ ℤ and I have a signature σ from its inventor that says "doomrobo owns k". Suppose in a year the trend has passed and I'd like to sell k. How do I transfer ownership to someone else? Clearly sending σ doesn't suffice, since σ is public. Do I need a new signature?

Ok different setup: σ is actually a signature from me and the inventor saying "the non-inventor pubkey that signed of this message is the owner of k". How do I transfer σ now? Do I send my signing secret key? Who makes sure I deleted my copy of the signing key?

Do you find that the lack of a browser extension makes it easier to get phished by failing to accurately read the URL? That's one of the stronger arguments I've heard for a browser autofill feature

I set up a mumble server at the beginning of the pandemic to talk to my friends. It quickly fell out of use for the same reasons you gave. Shame to see such high quality audio software give way to closed source alternatives

My first thought was this is cool as hell. My second thought was who is going to pick up the thousands of pieces of litter

Here's an interesting benefit this has over inline markup languages: it's natively compatible with text-based CRDTs. Normally, collaborative rich text editing is a strictly harder problem than plain text editing [0]. This is because there is extra structure (e.g., if someone puts a beginning "*" bold in the middle of a sentence, and that sentence is deleted by someone else, then you might end up with an unterminated bold sequence).

But if you swap out inline syntax for per-line syntax, then it seems like plain text CRDT should be enough for collaborative Aftertext editing. Pretty cool

[0] https://www.inkandswitch.com/peritext/

Why is "Twitter" a stand-in for "tech" as a whole. Tech definitely is a tool as the author says. But Twitter is a company with a tech stack and a website and incentives to feed people content that keeps them looking at ads. If I had to argue this I'd say that Twitter is the "monopoly that should be blown sky high", not the New York Times

For anyone reading, I ended up using Zotero with cloud sync. Papership for iOS isn't great but it works.

> healthy sportsmen and women seem to be dropping like flies

Just to avoid perpetuating a potential bias: can you provide numbers on this? And then if you can, provide the number per 100k of unvaccinated COVID deaths in their areas for their age

There is no debt to speak of though

The argument is a lazy abdication of responsibility. Also I'm like 90% sure that Hoan Ton-That, Clearview's founder gave the same exact argument for why he built it

To all, your defenses of the chaplain are more nuanced than even the authors of this article give. The sole argument they make is that the chaplain made "statement of...facts" and "facts are not racist, and stating facts is not racism." As discussed above, this may be true in a narrow sense, but the inclusion, exclusion, and sequencing of facts is the very basis of editorial narrative. If we agree that bigoted diatribes such as the white supremacist example above are a sequence of carefully chosen facts, then how is this a valid defense of anything?