Honestly surprised to see it licensed as MIT now too. It was something less permissive before. They aren't doing anything too crazy, more like being the first ones to be open about it.
I couldn't imagine what else companies like Google or Meta or TikTok can extract out of it that no one else can't. Integrations aren't exactly hard to make, quality is hard yes, but making half assed plumbing is sufficient too.
Those advertisers benefit from monopolistic markets with zero regulation while owning the platforms they sell advertising on that requires their explicit malware in order to use, what is unique about their finger printing versus what fingerprintjs provides?
The 100% charging readout is the desktop-with-no-battery phantom. I pushed a stricter filter for that earlier, you may be on a cached copy (try a hard refresh). On the light-mode call: the page detects your preference but doesn't honor it, intentionally. The irony being that the demo ignores the same signal it points out. I take the cost of the annoyance.
> It would probably still be low contrast garbage even if it did. :/
My guess this is LLM slop website generation. And they forgot to prompt to include high contrast text... And the site owner cant make the changes without a sloperator.
yeah it told me I'm "in Los Angeles" but that's just the time zone I'm in. It also "thinks" that because I have two different languages as inputs that it has scored some kind of "gotcha", but I just happen to also frequently use a second language .
"English · Chinese
Your browser’s primary language is English. It also carries Chinese. This tells us not just what language you speak, but often where you were raised, where you have lived, or who you live with. This is transmitted in the header of every HTTP request. It has been doing this for as long as you have used this browser."
No, the fact that I have English and Chinese as input languages does not tell it "where I was raised, where I have lived, or who I have lived with.". Might as well say "the fact that you're using a phone to look at the Internet tells reveals that you are someone who can access a phone to look at the Internet!". Yes, technologies interact with other technologies. That's how "technologies" work. Is it Orwellian? Yes. But is it more Orwellian than the surveillance states of Russia/China/North Korea. etc? We also can now find our phones/cars/devices that can share location, locate criminals by way of their online activity, record incidents that"need" to be recorded (like when ppl are committing crimes or when police officers need to be held accountable for their behavior). Catastrophizing about the "overreach" of tech is a cognitive choice. That all being said, it is good to be aware of what info our technologies "know" about us.
I'm using Apple's Private Relay VPN so it was hundreds of miles off. It's always interesting to see where websites or services think I'm located using their geolocation databases, but if I turn it off they can pinpoint me within a couple of miles. Thankfully almost nobody has ever blocked Apple's VPN, so I never have to turn it off.
> Since you can detect light mode, would it kill you to honor it?
Seriously, I'm in my mid-30s but some of these dark mode sites make me feel mid-80s. I can't see shit on this site.
Same, it said Riverside but I'm in San Diego (about 100 miles away from Riverside).
Of course, its just using a geolocation database for the IP address and thus reporting the location of some switching center Verizon runs and not my actual location.
If you're trying to prove a point about privacy its probably best not to lead off with information that can be off by hundreds of miles while presenting the fact that it "knows" this information as being darkly ominous.
Presenting this information while being wrong probably does the opposite of the site's intent and gives some people a false sense of security because what real websites and apps track about you using digital fingerprinting is a lot more detailed, personalized and (usually) correct than what this website presents.
> Surely you can infer when you work and sleep from your experience living your life as you.
Not everybody has a schedule. Mine is essentially "eat when hungry, sleep when tired", and my sleep patterns more closely follow a 26-hour day than a 24-hour day.
This is fascinating, please do tell more about it! How does it affect your mental health? How do you deal with times day and night are flipped? How does it affect your social life?
What is "it"? Putting the two halves together, the sort of people who want to be in a community where they aren't wanted are the sort of people you don't want in that community. I guess I can't argue with that.
They are talking about social norms. Inversely, "creepers".
Most adults understand why men should not, generally, be hanging out in the women's clothing department. When accidental violations of those norms are pointed out, they apologize and correct. Creepers, OTOH, gonna creep.
For their own well-being, online communities should police repeated violation of social norms. Otherwise the normals leave and creepers take over.
That got downvoted. But alt images are for inclusivity, for people who can't see the images. Only one of these says "surreal", the rest of them would lead you to believe that they are normal images. So it's performative inclusivity that actually excludes people. It would have been better to say "this AI generated image of the act of knitting is accidentally bizarre in a subtle way" as the alt text for every image.
It's superficially true, currently. We've had generative AI for a few years and people are using it to make a quick buck. But even if the world had been taken over by communism, or if the Western Highlands of Papua New Guinea had got imperial ambitions and now we all lived in a gift economy, people would still be using generative AI to gain attention and status. This will work until it wears thin. Thinner.
Well, I'm not clairvoyant, but this is a very easy prediction to make. And we're not talking about decades in the future, this is simply a matter of letting the near-future unfold.
Cease this wild extrapolation, which starts at dementia, passes through a casual myth called "brain rot", and ends at games. I like games and I like being idle. I don't like the judgmental concept of "productive activity" and I don't think that arbitrarily occupying yourself, even if you produce something, is inherently worthy and good. I produce certain things with my ass, gimme a medal.
Where does the "art is about inciting a response" theory originate from?
I went and looked at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_art but couldn't find it there. The "anti-essentialist" section is good, though, I think. It has Berys Gaut listing ten properties of art, all of which are nice-to-have but none of which are essential. Then if a piece ticks lots of boxes it's a shoo-in, but if it doesn't tick many of them you can argue about it.
Some of those involve eliciting some sort of response, but you could also have a decorative piece with this combo:
Which would be 8 out of 10, to which we could add "completely ignorable" and it could still be art. I don't see why attention-grabbing and provocation is important, and it certainly isn't sufficient on its own, plus it's irritating.
It's an idea, it describes something real. We can all make our own guesses and our own assertions about what that is, and then we can critique them and try to make them agree. There's no point just saying "we can all think whatever we like about anything" and leaving it there.
That just means you're both wrong. "Its location - Waterloo Place, St James's - is an area designed to celebrate imperialism and military dominance in the 1800s", says the BBC. Banksy is from Bristol, where they threw a statue of a slave-trading philanthropist in the river. The statue is wearing a suit. It's not very interpretable. We can wonder whether it's about the Conservative party or the Reform party, but nobody's suggesting it represents Hamas or the CCP.
※ I admit that Xi Jinping wears a suit, but I'm still classifying that theory under "plausible deniability".
Every single comment that proudly declares "my interpretation is obviously the correct one and you other guys are wrong" only further serves to prove what an actual great piece of art this is. That is, it's art that makes you think and can be validly interpreted in many different ways, and more serves as a projection of the own viewer.
Who necessarily cares what the original design of Waterloo Place is for, it's also just a place in the center of London with lots of foot traffic, visibility and a ton of statues. Or that the place Banksy is from threw a statue into the river (that connection in particular is quite the stretch - are you saying all the things that happened in your home town are inherently reflections of you?).
The more I see people declare that their interpretation is "right" (just see the argument thread over whether right wing or left wing people are more likely to wrap themselves up in a flag), the more I think this is a pretty brilliant piece of art.
That's not brilliant, and it's not important to art. It's more like clickbait.
The statue is blank because deliberate ambiguity is the arty thing to do, because provocation is supposed to be a praiseworthy aspect of art.
But it's paper-thin ambiguity, and ambiguity isn't praiseworthy anyway. Inexplicit meaning is praiseworthy, but that's something else. This statue just has a veneer to suggest that it might possibly be saying something other than what the artist obviously thinks, if you know all about him, as we do.
* It's running a kind of Chrome on a kind of Linux, at a stretch.
* Nobody can infer when I work and when I sleep. That includes me.
* The recent, high-end display is the screen of a low-end tablet I bought in a supermarket five years ago.
* But yes, browser fingerprinting is annoying.
* Since you can detect light mode, would it kill you to honor it?
reply