top notch exploration, and the story was just the right amount.

lol

Is there really any other reaction?

Many sites have had to enable reveal passwords for people with complicated passwords not using password managers.

It’s low risk, but their numbers are also coming from fairly dated hardware and is just proof of concept. It can almost certainly be speed up significantly.

Yeah as the other person suggested i suspect it’s more like “when do these expire?” “does this have mold on it?” “what does this sign say?”

You might get some about “does this match?” but i don’t know

The problem is that so many browsers leverage hardware acceleration and offer access to the GPUs. So yes, the browsers could fix the issue, but the underlying cause is the way GPUs handle data that the attack is leveraging. Fixing it would likely involve not using hardware acceleration.

As these patterns are processed by the iGPU, their varying degrees of redundancy cause the lossless compression output to depend on the secret pixel. The data-dependent compression output directly translates to data-dependent DRAM traffic and data-dependent cache occupancy. Consequently, we show that, even under the most passive threat model—where an attacker can only observe coarse-grained redundancy information of a pattern using a coarse-grained timer in the browser and lacks the ability to adaptively select input—individual pixels can be leaked. Our proof-of-concept attack succeeds on a range of devices (including computers, phones) from a variety of hardware vendors with distinct GPU architectures (Intel, AMD, Apple, Nvidia). Surprisingly, our attack also succeeds on discrete GPUs, and we have preliminary results indicating the presence of software-transparent compression on those architectures as well.

It sounds distantly similar to some of the canvas issues where the acceleration creates different artifacts which makes it possible to identify GPUs and fingerprint the browsers.

I read that to mean it’s a digital download only and not a physical copy in stores, but didn’t put much thought into it.

The intent is to ban books about topics they don’t like racism, queers, trans folks, abortion, etc as part of the “war on wokeness”. They pretend that they’re sexually graphic or things kids shouldn’t learn about, but it’s incredibly unlikely schools ever had books beyond a few classics.

Obviously, these are everyday topics so it’s going to ban a lot of neighboring content, probably including the bible. Regardless, because it’s at a state-run institution, it’s unconstitutional.

The kids will hear about all of these topics in much greater detail on fox news every day anyway, so this is entirely for show and to cause chaos.

Great summary! a teensy nitpick. I wouldn’t say the most recent court said it was “fine” per se since they didn’t give any reasoning. It is at least possible, that there is a technical issue with earlier rulings. It could be minor technicality, and they let the law take effect pending the next court date?

I think your implication is likely correct, and this is probably political, but we really don’t know the reason, and I think not giving one is surprising.

Yeah, that’s my problem. I added it after they commented.

OP NOTE: This is actually a week old, today 3 judge panel allowed the ban to go into effect. Here’s the author’s mastodon post about it. though there are few other details and I can’t find a new story about it.

BREAKING: A three-judge panel of the 5th Circuit (Elrod, Haynes, Douglas) allows Texas’s book-ban law to go into effect, issuing an administrative stay of the district court ruling enjoining enforcement of the law.
The court gave no reasoning for its order, which is remarkable given that the law has never been allowed to go into effect, so the order — although posed as merely “administrative” — is a ruling, at least temporarily, changing the status of state law.

You should 100% lie when you can. You can give every site a different email address, name, birthday, gender, and location and just note all of that in your password manager.

However, there’s a lot you just can’t control, like other people catching you in their pictures.

Or leave the house 😢

This only sorta works for today and if your friends never share images or videos online. The ever-increasing amount of people taking pictures and filming and posting them online means the day is quickly approaching where you could be identified and tracked through other people’s content, security & surveillance cameras, etc.

If stores start adopting the tracking used at Walmart and the Amazon biometric data, social media will be the last of your worries.

Who says there’s no innovation in tech companies today? lol

Avatar checks out

Absolutely, but this is another “don’t tempt me with a great time” example. Where certain a politican tries to name something they think is awful, but actually sounds like something great.

I have no idea what their business model is, but this would be a great way to collect more data for training various forms of AI. Arguably without harvesting people’s personal data or their creative works.

I also suspect that because it’s an assistive tool, it can probably get a fair bit of grant money.

I didn’t dig too much into it, but my guess would be no.

Even if you could verify, it’s still an ethical grey area as it’s taking works they paid photographers to generate new works potentially without crediting the original photographers? Their own website tells people they have to credit the original photographer, and I’d be surprised if the AI lists all the works it used to create it.

GOP: “We support our troops” [by executing them]

Yes, it’s a press release, but I think this is maybe a an interesting use for some of the AI to augment that of volunteers who help describe and annotate for people who have vision challenges.