I thought the same thing when I first read it!

We call 'em ALPRs (Automated License Plate Readers) here, but yeah it’s essentially the same thing.

Their cameras are regularly abused by police officers to stalk ex’s, have begun to be used outside their original scope, can be used illegally by one agency on behalf of another that shouldn’t have access, and have been used by Flock employees to, without permission from local authorities and against their own public statements, watch children in a gym for hours while partially erasing audit logs.

They also use Flock to monitor protestors, and track abortion seekers, all while lying about their effectiveness in preventing crime, threatening people who follow their actions, and leaving countless cameras publicly exposed without password protection, covering up vulnerabilities, and lying to city officials about Flock officials watching cameras, like the ones spying on children.

They’re really fucked up, and it’s my stance that the CEO of the company and any of the employees watching footage without consent should be criminally charged for espionage, and defrauding the public, among other things.

Only if other reviews are missing major context.

If a product I bought a year ago breaks, but everyone else wrote their review the day after they got it and said it was great, I’m gonna write a review telling you it might not last as long as you think, for example.

Once I got pulled aside before even getting through the security line, then the people rummaging through my bags and patting me down started gambling real money with each other about what my age was before I told them -_-

Mozilla uses “they’re” to refer to Kit, but other than that there’s no explicit statement at all.

Kit is a companion, not a commentator. They’re not here to deliver punchlines. Kit shows up as a small signal that Firefox is working for you, then steps back so you can keep moving.

It does have its flaws though. For example, if you use uBlock Origin, your browser’s requests to the ad networks’ servers never make it.

If you use AdNauseam, the requests do make it. This means the ad networks will get your IP address, what page you were on, browser fingerprints, etc.

Essentially, you spam click ads, but at the cost of… giving them all the data they’d normally get if you didn’t have an ad blocker and spam clicked ads.

Most of these networks can filter out obvious bot behavior like just clicking every single ad repeatedly, so at the end of the day it’s unlikely to do much harm to them, but it sure as hell will give them a lot of trackable data about your browsing history.

I do believe it’s more effective when the extension is set to only click ads somewhat occasionally though. Enough to drain extra money, while still just looking like a person that tends to click ads more frequently than others, instead of clicking every single one.

Hence why this article is about them leaving the openly Nazi billionaire’s platform while remaining on other platforms that are mainstream and still provide a lot of reach :)

What are we even doing, man…

Exactly. AI slop is just that. Slop.

If it’s just an AI doing something useful, we don’t call it slop, we just call it AI.

When Google’s AlphaFold predicted the folding of over 200 million protein structures, and won a nobel prize for it, I don’t think anyone would call all the research using it to make cures to diseases slop.

I totally recommend just clicking through random pages on there for a good 10 minutes or so. You’ll be surprised at how many random, cool, interesting things you find that you’d probably never see otherwise in a million years. (also an AMAZING place to find small blogs to add to your RSS reader of choice)

They feed a lot of this into their main search index if you pay for Kagi search too, so a lot of these sites will appear higher than they would on Google, Bing, DuckDuckGo, etc, if their content is relevant. Especially fediverse sources.

The email dump has an email in it that’s ALL in Papyrus 😭

(File 2010-03-16 03-04-26 Sugar.eml)

Only when:

• The art isn’t significantly tied to the artist’s views/publicly spouted opinions/decisions/etc (e.g. if the artist is a Nazi, you can’t really separate an artwork they made with a swastika from the artist. If they painted a nice flower field 10 years ago, it’s hard to say that it is likely to carry any Nazi-adjacent themes, and is probably pretty distinct from whatever they’d make if they made art now)
• Consuming the art doesn’t financially support the artist (so in the case of J.K Rowling, you could pirate the books, or read a copy you already have, but you can’t buy new ones (or get them on loan from somewhere that could compensate her, like a library), pay to stream the movies, go to a theme park based on the work, or buy any licensed merchandise, assuming you want to not give her money and thus separate her from the work)
• Your consumption of the art won’t indirectly cause someone else to benefit the artist (e.g. you wear a shirt you already own with Harry Potter on it, and it reminds someone else of the series and they buy the books)

Could work. A lot of the time these current systems have… dubious liveness checks.

Over time they’re definitely going to get better, though, and I have a feeling that with AI watermarking being baked into a lot of the actually good models, it’s not going to be super reliable or repeatable.

Hence why I said most.

Regardless though, you know they’re gonna up the ante as they go. The more normalized it becomes to share more data, the easier it is for them to ask everyone for it too.

This leak was from 2025.

Regardless, it’s published on the (new, not taken-down domain of) DDoSecrets

You can torrent it, too.

Most age verification providers also require video with the person’s face doing specific movements, which is then matched with the ID, so stealing an ID probably wouldn’t be enough.

Not that it’ll stop kids from trying, and sending their parent’s ID to some random sketchy company without their knowledge anyways.

Wow, I honestly wasn’t expecting that!

I actually got to meet Cindy Cohn at an event she did recently, and she’s definitely really knowledgeable and seems to be a damn good leader.

Sad to see she’s stepping down, but I don’t blame her for it. She’s been at it for a long time!

Also, if anyone’s considering it, yes, her new book is quite good, and you should most definitely get it!

On the plus side, this kills the SEO market.

IMO this doesn’t kill the SEO market, it just brings it in-house, just like Google has tried to do with all kinds of other things. If you’ve ever seen the little dropdown question options in Google’s search results page that give you the answer right from the website without you having to visit it, you know what I’m talking about.

Just like the dropdowns, which simply take the website and use it as a way for Google to show you the answer rather than the site itself, this doesn’t kill the market for SEO, it just allows Google to decide how to “optimize” the results from their search engine to you, rather than the site itself, and earn more of a profit from it as a result.

You could make that argument about any tool Wikipedia editors use. Why should they need spellcheck? They were typing words just fine before.

…except it just makes it easier to spot errors or get little suggestions on how you could reword something, and thus makes the whole process a little smoother.

It’s not strictly necessary, but this could definitely be helpful to people for translation and proofreading. Doesn’t have to be something people are wholly reliant on to still be beneficial to their ability to edit Wikipedia.