Fedora
- 3 Posts
- 158 Comments
I get the frustration here, but it’s also kind of… idk? A “No, you just don’t understand!” response. Everyone who works in a white-collar job knows what it’s like. Everyone has different theories about why that project failed, but nobody knows the objective truth. Nobody can present a “documented and verified” list of reasons for why the project failed, not even the lead designer here. They can guess, but never reach the truth. He could repeat what he always did without changing anything in the next project, and succeed due to different circumstances, plain good luck.
I didn’t describe what could happen, but what did happen in real life. Multiple times.
MCBans is open-source btw, yet nobody checked and changed the source code, as should be expected really. Operators whitelisted alts and friends. Blacklisted server owners who didn’t appreciate that the operators of their global ban list griefed their servers with backdoors.
Another typical example is 3rd-party Discord ban lists. They whitelist their own staff. They backdoor their bots to fuck around with servers. It’s just the reality of global ban lists.
If Erlite doesn’t abuse that trust, then someone with admin access will, or Erlite’s successor. That’s a fact, not an opinion. Email spam filters prevent single trust lists with scores, multiple lists, etc.
There is no anti-cheat, instead a global ban tracking system was put in place and server admins are now able to share the identities of players who have been caught cheating, banning them on every server, regardless of who is running them, by the hosts simply opting into the global ban system.
A global ban system without a more nuanced approach is a terrible idea. Operators of that global ban system will whitelist themselves, blacklist people they hate, and maybe even backdoor the mod that enables them to ban people in the first place. Server admins have no choice but to either opt into the entire system or have none at all, and both of these options suck. We’ve seen how this plays out already.
Score players by your own criteria, weight everything with different blacklists, greylists and whitelists, etc. and ban players if they exceed a threshold automatically. It won’t be perfect, but email catches most spam emails that way just fine.
You conflate VPN providers have an incentive to store no logs with it’s impossible to verify whether VPN providers store logs. It’s like trusting your friend to keep a secret. They promise not to write down what you say, but you can’t be sure. You accept that risk in your threat model, and that’s fine. But newcomers should judge that risk themselves. I feel like “Don’t worry bro, they don’t keep logs.” is an inappropriate response to people that’re about to commit a crime that can land them in jail.
Man, that’d be horrible! Imagine people could exercise their rights. Thank God we live in a world of zero digital ownership with anti DRM circumvention laws to strip everyone from rights copyright laws are supposed to grant. We can sue anyone that scans books and lends them out 1:1 as that’s untransformative and unfair use. But hey, it’s a free market! Let’s offer them e-books with DRM for $15 that libraries can only lend out 15 times, 20 hours total read time or three months after purchase, whichever comes first, and then jack up the price to $30 when they’re locked into the ecosystem. Sounds like a fair deal to me! Not like they have an alternative.
Because Defender already covers what DNS blacklists block and more with less false positives and a proper way to manage exceptions for non-technical people. Older malware is a solved problem for Defender since it’s literally pre-installed everywhere. VPN providers don’t have a way to manage DNS blacklist exceptions, so have fun disabling your VPN to do any research. You also don’t get to choose the blacklists your VPN provider uses. Saying 3. is not a point is like saying malware that’s always able to bypass your anti-malware solution is irrelevant.
I can’t call DNS blacklists part of defense in depth. DNS blacklists are a poor man’s version of existing and pre-installed anti-malware software.
- DNS blacklists block only older known malware, similar to existing anti-malware, but less effective.
- DNS blacklists block hijacked, but legit websites that host malware, contrary to existing anti-malware.
- DNS blacklists? What is that? I use DoH, get fucked. Contrary to existing anti-malware.
They’re completely bypassable, they boast a high false positive rate due to how threat actors host malware, and they don’t even block newer malware. Just use Windows Defender. It ain’t perfect, but it’s leagues better than any DNS blacklist.
I worked on software that’s roughly as bug-free as a living bug. Intended behavior crashed the software. The master branch was broken, no way to compile the software without local changes. Devs hunted down suppressed exceptions to find out why everything crashes and burns on a daily basis. Unit tests are in the backlog, we’ll get around to it eventually.
Code reviews are ask whoever is available to approve your changes without looking at the code. Most seniors abused suppressed exceptions to use the Java Streams API, no proper technical justification. So my first official task was to unsuppress all exceptions. This caught many seniors off-guard, but made crashes infinitely easier to diagnose.
I would’ve done that even if it wasn’t my task. Shotgun debugging is hell. I don’t want to learn which component is most likely to fail silently due to retarded suppressed exceptions. Do your job properly ffs. Don’t shoot others in the foot. Don’t shoot yourself in the foot. You have absolutely no reason to shoot people’s feet. Stop it.
Copyright today is shit tho. It’d be more logical to talk about how much it costs the public to maintain a fundamentally broken system to keep a few companies with a dysfunctional business model on life support.
Rights holders take people and organisations to court for a lot of shit that should be thrown straight out of court. But no no, the people who protect and protected the interests of organisations that benefit from copyright laws wrote the copyright laws. If they couldn’t pass their extremist copyright laws locally, they’d try again nationally, then internationally, until their contradictory and ass-backwards copyright laws got passed. Other countries copied these laws.
- Copyright laws implicit registration robs the public domain of works made by unidentifiable authors.
- Copyright laws force the digital world to play by impossible rules.
- Copyright laws forbid DRM circumvention, but that contradicts with existing copyright rights.
- Copyright laws forbid digitization of analog media if the judge considers this untransformative or unfair use.
- Copyright laws may allow snippet taxes for daring to use an excerpt of a news article without paying an arm and a leg.
- Copyright laws may forbid fair use, banning reviews, etc.
- Copyright laws force libraries to buy e-books under unfair conditions due to DRM and the digitization edge case.
… the list goes on. Copyright laws in their current form should be thrown in the trash and burned alive while we can. The EU Copyright Directive is so fundamentally broken that member states postpone enacting the directive into national laws, years after the set deadline. Member states copy and paste the directive, unwilling to spend the effort to revise existing laws to conform to the over-reaching copyright directive.
Customers obviously don’t understand the value we provide them, so we must force them to continue to use and pay for our services. They get a once in a lifetime opportunity to understand just how valuable our services are. If they still don’t understand, they merely didn’t see the light yet, and must continue to pay and use our services.
This is about account deletion, not cancellation. But cancellation is also a fun topic in its own right. I don’t know about Germany, but cancellations are a solved problem here in Austria, even accounting for shady business practices. 3rd-party services exist that fully automate the cancellation process for most cases. They email the company, send another reminder email, store the email server response as evidence for court, and submit a complaint to the responsible Schlichtungsstelle, which then light a fire under their ass to cancel your service. If they’re retarded enough to not cancel your service, then you can always take them to court with the stored evidence.
This only skips step 1 – 5 for Crunchyroll. You still have 8 steps to go. Nevermind, they’ve got email addresses for privacy inquiries, hidden beneath their infinite scroll anime overview, in the “Your Rights” section, behind the “this page” link. Although I wonder whether they force you to go through their painful process nevertheless.
Woah there! Having the privilege to choose a streaming service that has a show you want. Those are some bold assumptions. We over here at anime land have former illegal streaming services with exclusive global licenses, even though they only operate nationally. Pirates overseas can’t watch their favorite anime of the season legally. They must either use a VPN to pay for a service that’ll ban them for VPN usage, or pirate the anime.
My mental model is that when the tutorial was written there was one file, now TG4 have gotten more cautious and split it up into tiny one-second segments. Is this hypothesis right?
The Media Presentation Description (MPD) is a document that contains metadata required by a DASH Client to construct appropriate HTTP-URLs to access Segments and to provide the streaming service to the user.
Not quite. What you see is normal. Browsers look at MPD documents to know where to download video segments. They then play these video segments. You probably saw a 5 second long video segment that displays the TG4 logo.
Is there a way to do Step 2 in https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/404994-Decryption-and-the-Temple-of-Doom ?
DevTools only record network traffic after you open the DevTools. So maybe try to open the DevTools, refresh the page, and play the video. You’re looking a link that starts with https://manifest.prod.boltdns.net/manifest/v1/dash/live-baseurl/bccenc and ends with manifest.mpd. Here’s the decryption key id and key itself at the time of writing, separated by a colon:
275e573642ec45d3b4c51b86e94d508f:7cd815f999bc2c99e4ddb47901a8cc66
Where does this assertion come from that people that use sponsorblock are somehow never going to buy products? People keep saying it but I just don’t get it. We live in a world where people buy things. Some products are relevant to some people and some aren’t to other people. I use sponsorblock and adblock, and if I were to somehow see an advert for a product that seemed like it perfectly fit a need that I had, I’d definitely consider getting the product.
I use SponsorBlock. Ads have an influence on me, but usually with a negative impact on whatever they sell, so it’s beneficial for them that I don’t see their ads.
If I was looking for a fantasy-themed, turn-based role-playing gacha game, and a specific game annoys the fuck out of me with their massive marketing budget, they’re automatically on my blacklist. I’ll proactively ignore the game in my market research and exclude the game, the game’s company and publisher from my Google search results with the uBlacklist browser extension.
If it’s a SaaS and they charge a premium for SSO, they get a once in a lifetime opportunity to land on a public wall of shame that some sysadmins use to preemptively filter out software vendors from their purchasing process. So it’s a really shitty idea to advertise crap to the wrong people.
Advertisers that care a lot about engagement use CTR instead of CPM. CTR enables advertisers to keep track of engagement and lie about real engagement numbers to save costs. If advertisers rely on video segment statistics, creators can fake the statistics to earn more money. So advertisers rarely measure their payout based on unverifiable information. And people that use SponsorBlock wouldn’t buy it, even without SponsorBlock. Or in other words: Most creators can ignore SponsorBlock.
Welcome to the Widevine rabbit hole!
There’re 3 different Widevine CDM levels:
- L1, the 4K holy grail
- L2, the one nobody cares about
- L3, the odd one
Streaming services decide what content and quality they offer to which Widevine CDM level. Although Widevine or Google, really, recommends what quality to offer which Widevine CDM level, though not everyone adheres to these recommendations.
L1, like I said, is the 4K holy grail. It’s the highest Widevine CDM level and as such enjoys the highest level of access. L2 is irrelevant. L3 is a weird one, Google recommends 720p for L3 Widevine CDM from Android devices, but 1080p for ChromeCDM, which is an L3 Widevine CDM shipped with Google Chrome. For some godawful reason, select streaming services allow 4K content for L3 Widevine CDMs, which is why one streaming service can have more 4K WEBDLs than another streaming service despite an identical content roster. Most streaming services serve 1080p content to L3 Widevine CDMs.
How can you get an Widevine L1 CDM, you may ask? For one, you can’t buy one, that’s always a scam. Sometimes, there’re leaks, but streaming services revoke these leaked CDMs quickly. You can break the Qualcomm Trusted Execution Environment (TEE) to get an Widevine L1 CDM from Android devices. But the TEE is a high-profile target for everything Android related, so chances are it’s not gonna happen. But this is what they want you to do. Instead, ignore the TEE, hack manufacturers and issue your own Widevine L1 CDMs, or steal Widevine L1 CDMs from freshly produced smartphones, smart tvs, etc. Alternatively, try to work yourself into a position where you can steal Widevine L1 CDMs. Or operate a legal business and become a Widevine L1 CDM issuer yourself.
Widevine L3 CDMs are a solved problem. Dump them from rooted Android devices. ChromeCDM requires software reverse engineering skills.
But the answer to that question is always yes. No system is secure. It’s always possible to crack software. And how does that answer help you? It doesn’t, because you want to pirate a specific software, not know whether it’s theoretically possible to pirate the software in question. What’s the most helpful answer to the indirect question of how to pirate this software? A link to a crack, of course.
- •
- 1Y
- •
- •
- youtu.be
- •
- 1Y
- •
… from committing the severe crime of copyright infringement, of course!