I’m an IT guy right with you but I’m also a linguist:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_description?wprov=sfla1

WOOOO

just by being the biggest player in the system so all the activity is on their server, then they shut it down and leave the rest of the drivers with a big hole in the community.

What is swill

Overwhelming plastic garbage

Of course not. The fingerless gloves are also niche, boutique, and premium.

Is commenting for engagement boost a thing?

This is incredible and I never could have imagined it. This will democratize the power of programming

Your position assumes also that no photos can be staged. That’s a whole category of “true” photos that tell a false narrative.

Vimeo is a private operation just like YouTube.

Peertube is a “federated” system where videos are hosted among the computers of the people who upload videos.

Dvorak is a cypher of Qwerty tho. Anything typed in Dvorak but transcribed as english can be reliably identified and decyphered

I think I might have achieved security through obscurity. My custom keyboard is a unique shape and almost all the keys are one unit. Not only is it different enough from a traditional keyboard that the neural network probably won’t understand it, the function layers I use obscure whether I’m typing a letter at all.

Well… Mathematicians would agree with me

Nah, lying by omission can still tell a totally wrong narrative. Sometimes it has to be the whole truth to be the truth.

“that it’s a true representation of what someone saw.”

Someone please correct me if I’m wrong but photography has never ever ever been a “true” representation of what you took a picture of.

Photography is right up there with statistics in its potential for “true” information to be used to draw misleading or false conclusions. I predict that a picture with this technology may carry along with it the authority to impose a reality that’s actually not true by pointing to this built-in encryption to say “see? the picture is real” when the deception was actually carried out by the framing or timing of the picture, as has been done often throughout history.

If voting with your money is a valid way for people to collectively decide right and wrong, does that mean people with more money get more votes?

Does that mean the people with the most money get the most votes?

If that’s all true, does that mean if someone has way more money than everyone else, they get to decide what’s right and wrong?

For what it’s worth, every article I’ve seen from them was pretty poignant, relevant, and funny.