KairuByte

joined 1 year ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 9 hours ago

And if that location is within Ukraine?

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

They do fight it. They cracked down on it a couple months back. Didn’t stop all users, and it wouldn’t stop just asking a friend in the respective country to buy it for you and pay them on the side.

Which is my point. You’re coming at this like it’s Joe Everybody is being discussed, when we are talking about an entire country which is actively succeeding at influencing other countries.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 17 hours ago

Except it’s cross posts, which isn’t even a repeat, it’s just the same content. They just got their panties in a twist because the world didn’t work the way they wanted it to for 3 whole minutes.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 17 hours ago

This is a weird thing to get offended on when you’re the one that brought up the thing it’s countering. Anyone saying it is just being pedantic, and while they are technically correct they (usually) aren’t suggesting people kill themselves instead of going vegan. You getting offended at pedantry is… odd.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

You are all talking about “happy path” situations. Yeah, if the people involved are honest you’re absolutely right.

I’m talking about when a government funded effort, with agents in all reaches of the world, make a concerted effort to get their hands on tech, and trick that tech into working for them.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

Are you saying that geolocation of a starlink unit is difficult from the starlink satellite network?

In 99% of cases? No. In the case of a state actor intentionally wanting to obsfucate the location? Absolutely.

Do you see a moral dimension to this?

You’re either missing the point or ignoring it. If you bothered to read around that sentence, you’d realize that in context it has nothing to do with morals, and everything to do with other companies with a financial incentive failing to do it. If a company loses out on 75+% of their profit when I pay for YouTube out of India, and fail to stop me despite active efforts, how do you expect a company to manage it against a state actor.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com -5 points 19 hours ago

This explains nothing. Russia infiltrates governments and your answer is “yeah, well starlink should just be honest.”

There are already hardware solutions that can bypass those. Utilize video output from a PC, interrupt user input to react, add in humanesque delay. There’s no reason cheat software has to be as blatant as Minecraft auto fight cheats.

Can they be caught? Sure. Human pushes the limits too far, manual checks to see if you react like a human, etc. but you’re talking about a 100% effective anticheat, and I’m telling you there is no such thing.

It’s like claiming you can make an internet connected device that is “unhackable”.

IconTwitter seems to fit the naming convention better.

Tbh it’d be nice if Lemmy actually put the reason given in place of the comment instead of just “removed”. That way you wouldn’t even need to respond, just properly articulate the why in the removal itself.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Not to be a pedant, but “they are” is a much less jarring way to refer to someone of unknown gender than “he/she is.”

view more: next ›