Syn_Attck

You should spread that idea around more, it's pretty ingenious. I'd add first converting to B&W if possible.

This is a great point. Image watermarking steganography is nearly impossible to defeat unless you can obtain multiple copies of the 'same' file from multiple users to look for differences. It could be a change of a single 5-15 pixels from one rgb code off.

rgb(255, 251, 0)

to

rgb(255, 252, 0)

Which would be imperceptable to the human eye. Depending on the number of users it may need to change more or less pixels.

There is a ton of work in this field and its very interesting, for anyone considering majoring in computer science / information security.

Another 'neat' technology everyone should know about is machine identification codes, or, the tiny ~~secret~~ tracking dots that color printers print on every page to identify the specific make, model, and serial number (I think?) of the printer the page was printed from. I don't believe B&W printers have tracking dots, which were originally used to track creators of counterfeit currency. EFF has a page of color printers which do not include tracking dots on printed pages. This includes color LaserJets along with InkJets, although I would not be surprised if there was a similar tracking feature in place now or in the future "for safety and privacy reasons," but none that I am aware of.

Passcode. Not fingerprint.

Unfortunately that wouldn't work as this is information inside the PDF itself so it has nothing to do with the file hash (although that is one way to track.)

Now that this is known, It's not enough to remove metadata from the PDF itself. Each image inside a PDF, for example, can contain metadata. I say this because they're apparently starting a game of whack-a-mole because this won't stop here.

There are multiple ways of removing ALL metadata from a PDF, here are most of them.

It will be slow-ish and probably make the file larger, but if you're sharing a PDF that only you are supposed to have access to, it's worth it. MAT or exiftool should work.

Edit: as spoken about in another comment thread here, there is also pdf/image steganography as a technique they can use.

Funny, we get more complaints about DuckDuckGo browser than anything else, and that's one of the few we don't test on. I know this because I make it a point to have someone from CS tell me about consistent pain points users are having. I wonder how many complaints about Firefox not working your customer service team is getting daily and you just don't hear about it because they've been told to tell users "just say Firefox isn't a supported browser and to try installing Chrome."

You should ask someone in CS. Whichever agent bullshits the least (not the manager) - you might learn something.

Almost 3/10 people accessing your sites are using Firefox. All those "images not loading right or whatever" are probably blatant to them, making them think "wow, what an absolute shit website."

3 out of 10.

That's a nice thought.

Then you suddenly realize no one knows up from down or down from up. Society would shift on such a massive scale people would probably just stick their smartphones in a drawer and only use them to message people they already know personally and check them a few times a day like an answering machine.

Then suddenly you realize you haven't heard about Ukraine, Russia, Israel or Palestine in months. It's November 28th and you heard someone mention a 'new president' but you didn't even vote. Shit, you forgot to vote. There were no social media or news websites reminding you about the election and you didn't have it on your new wall calendar yet! Ah that's what all those "Vote Now!!!" yard signs were about, fuck....

It's a nice thought, but the internet is powered by ads. (Almost?) Every subscription-supported website is also ad-supported. The internet would basically go under. AFAIK all the Lemmy apps have ads too. It'd be a nice change to get back to get a force shove back to the early-mid 90's. Maybe we'd do things differently. People would certainly be outside talking to each other a lot more.

The number of Edge users is only a few % more, do you skip that too? Just check Chrome and Safari and call it a day?

As someone that uses only Firefox and knows others who do, this really surprises me. If a website is broken on Firefox then it's shitty webdev work and I'll find another store.

Since its servhold, you may be able to remove the offending content (for a short time, anything public-facing) and then contact reg.xyz to get it unsuspended. You're right though that's not very good customer service.

On a related note, it's possible a misconfiguration allowed some of the contents or index to be shown publicly and it got caught in a search engine and was taken down in an automated DMCA sweep. I believe .xyz is an American registrar so have to respond to DMCA but could be wrong on that. I like to stay with any .TLD that archive uses.. md, ph, etc.

https://help.sav.com/hc/en-us/articles/11933048624923-Resolving-serverHold-on-Your-Domain

Njalla just buys domains from major registrars on your behalf and owns them on your behalf. Godaddy, Tucows, etc. It was the owner of the entire .xyz space (gen.xyz) who shut your domain down. Njalla is just passing along the info. Porkbun will do the same.

Hitman denies being hitman and you believe him, that's your angle? I know you're being intentionally obtuse, but it's clear I was talking about the teenagers, not the woman trying not to be arrested.

Notice how it says it was consensual and they were at the age of consent?

The upper crust and intelligence apparatus was incredibly uncomfortable with OWS for obvious reasons.

Preface: short (2min) video of an Occupy meeting near the end https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W81A1kTXPa4

Pre-occupy, gender identity and race-based issues were known but not talked about a great deal in the public sphere. They weren't the core identity of a large number of people, and they were something that was 'allowed' to be discussed without blind following or rage.

During occupy, OWS organizers started what they called an 'egalitarian stance', which was a way to reframe the available classes to fight against in class warfare, were those more privileged than you (race, gender, identity politics) instead of financial privilege. If you were a white male, whether disabled or had a speech impediment or whatever, you were more privileged than anyone and you lost your rung in the ladder, you were now the lowest class. White women were just above you. Minority groups (race and gender, poverty level not included) became the prevailing upper-class and had the most right to speak.

OWS quickly lost momentum after a number of changes like this, and the conversation was no longer about class warfare, but about privilege, meaning only race and gender (initially). I believe there were leaked documents (unsure if verified) that the FBI was seeking, or had gained, access to OWS leadership positions. It seems obvious they would attempt it. This is something someone will have to confirm or correct me on, because a quick search isn't pulling the documents and I need to run.

Tangentially related, because who doesn't love graphs and data: https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/