174
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] The_sleepy_woke_dialectic@hexbear.net 28 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Their endgame is hooking directly into the TPM chip on your phone/computer to ensure you can't bypass ads, just like netflix, hulu, etc have done. Then the only recourse will be ripping all their videos to another hosting platform which they will then try to argue is a form of piracy.

This TPM bypassing will eventually be done by essentially pointing a camera at a screen (modern TVs have encryption baked in so even the video in transit is DRM protected), at which point the video hosting companies will bake in small differences/invisible watermarks that uniquely identify which user's account (which is linked to a real person who can suffer legal consequences) the video came from. Then we will have multiple cameras pointing at like 100 screens with an AI mixing them together to try to remove the differences/watermarks, at which point the hosting companies will create their own AI to counter and mislead the "piracy" AI pepe-silvia

This is also why ISPs took away your ability to run a personal server on your home computer using NATs, firewalls, and dynamic IPs instead of just transitioning to IPv6.

Also websites are going to start blocking firefox citing low user counts but you know what the real reason is nineteeneightyfour

I 100% believe this will happen because making commodities do as many as possible between any given creator and end-user just so they can provide more "Services" no one asked for and thus extract more value for not actually doing anything is like the only trick capitalism has left.

it-is-known

[-] ashinadash@hexbear.net 11 points 2 months ago

small differences/invisible watermarks that uniquely identify

This has never worked so far lol. Their "invisible watermark" always ruins the media even beyond treathog consumption levels.

Otherwise is there anything the individual user should be doing, short of not buying smart TVs (me) and not buying TPM chipped computers?

[-] GaveUp@hexbear.net 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

You're interpreting the term watermark too literally

It will be a small unique arrangement of just a few pixels to identify the user

It can even be distributed across the screen pixel by pixel to make it less noticeable

All they'd have to do is make each pixel 1 hex code lighter or darker or something

Assuming each pixel can have no change, 1 step lighter, or 1 step darker, it'd only take 22 pixels to cover 31B accounts = 3^22

I believe there's 25B Google accounts in total out there atm

[-] ashinadash@hexbear.net 4 points 2 months ago

In every frame, easily identifiable by a shitty pinhole camera though?

[-] GaveUp@hexbear.net 4 points 2 months ago

I updated my comment with more details

[-] ashinadash@hexbear.net 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

It's plausible but unlikely I think, putting a lot of faith into shitty pinhole cameras to be able to see twenty two 4K pixels one hex value lighter or darker, when most cameras have atrocious definition/sharpness and get blown out by light, blinded by darkness. I dunno, this reminds me of the screaming around Microsoft Kinect in 2013. They had bad and shitty plans for Kinect but, cheap hardware everyone hated Idk.

[-] FloridaBoi@hexbear.net 2 points 2 months ago

I feel like if you just slightly turn up the compression ratio then all that nuance is lost making the watermark nonexistent or unusable

[-] ashinadash@hexbear.net 3 points 2 months ago

Yes especially since Netflix in particular has atrocious compression.

[-] The_sleepy_woke_dialectic@hexbear.net 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

There exists a technology that takes elements in a picture, like a bird in the background, a character, a glass of water, etc and moves them just a few pixels. You can encode a lot of data like that and it's undetectable given just one example. They can encode your unique user identifier 1000 times in even a short video. A camera is bound to pick up at least part of it each time.

[-] ashinadash@hexbear.net 4 points 2 months ago

Quotin'

putting a lot of faith into shitty pinhole cameras to be able to see twenty two 4K pixels one hex value lighter or darker, when most cameras have atrocious definition/sharpness and get blown out by light, blinded by darkness.

I guess if the TV itself was doing the DRM recognition? Idk though, I've seen alarmist posting like this before... seems to me evil tech shit usually gets done in more mundane ways?

Its definitely possible and even trivial to do there are a thousand ways to encode just a few bytes of data undetectably in a video and nothing but motivation stopping them from using every one every where. I think it's plenty mundane and even trivial for what they get.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (18 replies)
this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2024
174 points (98.9% liked)

technology

23239 readers
176 users here now

On the road to fully automated luxury gay space communism.

Spreading Linux propaganda since 2020

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS