51–60 of 159 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
and what makes you say that?
It has all the tells. There are websites which list them, please search "LLM tropes".
Who owns your domain name? Hint: it’s probably not you. Your hosting provider could take down your domain, or even steal traffic and direct it to their own IPs
Yes you do own your domain, as much as you can own your house. Your hosting provider can only take down your hosting, not your domain. Seizing domain names isn't very common. And by the way, with Web3 domains, you have full ownership via your own private key, with no need to pay rent. Is it possible to lose your house that you own? Yes. It's far more rare to lose a domain you own, by it being seized. DNSSec is used t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This cheap criticism of the headline doesn’t actually apply to the problems brought up in the article: > Your PDS operator can post as you, like things as you, follow people as you, and it would be cryptographically indistinguishable from your real activity. The signatures are valid. Your domain name owner or DNS provider cannot redirect your domain name to a different server and cryptographically impersonate you.
Your DNS provider can obtain a TLS certificate for your domain and cryptographically impersonate https://yourdomain.tld It's not exactly the same thing but it's close.
In a social protocol or context, I would expect a private key to be in the private control of the individual, such as when someone uses their private key to sign an email or git commit.
The purpose of signing your emails or commits is to provide a good indicator that it actually came from you, not someone who managed to get access to your email account at the time.
Who owns your domain name? Hint: it’s probably not you. Your hosting provider could take down your domain, or even steal traffic and direct it to their own IPs
Yes you do own your domain, as much as you can own your house. Your hosting provider can only take down your hosting, not your domain. Seizing domain names isn't very common. And by the way, with Web3 domains, you have full ownership via your own private key, with no need to pay rent. Is it possible to lose your house that you own? Yes. It's far more rare to lose a domain you own, by it being seized. DNSSec is used t…
And regarding DNSSEC... if your domain is taken by the registrar (court order, ToS violation, etc.) or a government that can command the parent TLD to act, they can just revoke your old key and transfer the domain to someone else (or setup a placeholder under their own DNS) and now your protection and all concept of ownership is completely gone without your consent. This happened a few years ago with Epik seizing the soyjakparty and kiwifarms domains, including their hosting from a subsidiary company Terrahost... and KF has never even lost a lawsuit, but there are some specific people that really don't like them, and have gotten adept at claiming ToS violations via every possible company that touches them in order to try to make them go away.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Source? What I see here doesn't look good. https://bluefacts.app/bluesky-user-growth Never mind the pivot to reddit. https://www.cnbc.com/2026/06/04/bluesky-twitter-rival-reddit...
What’s the definition of success here? Instagram like user counts?
Probably doesn't matter for the "40M+ users", most of them have churned at this point and growth is negative. This is good critique for the next iteration of open social protocols, but fundamentally atproto did not fail because of technical reasons. The next iteration should make privacy the default and core to protocol, and be very mindful of how the leadership / social dynamics played out.
Bluesky / AT is the most successful open social network in history and the only one to become culturally significant. It has been adopted by presidents, celebrities, journalists, and mainstream users. Bluesky has ~50M registered users and has sustained ~5M monthly active users for long while. There's no reason to believe it will fall substantially below this level. It is also in the process of adding (decentralized)…
Who owns your domain name? Hint: it’s probably not you. Your hosting provider could take down your domain, or even steal traffic and direct it to their own IPs
And for lower bandwidth tasks, Tor Onions can't be beat. Just make sure to use 2fa on services you offer to keep the trash out. Things like fail2ban don't work the way you intend.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It has all the tells. There are websites which list them, please search "LLM tropes".
"This was AI" itself has all the tells of an irrational panic which typically accompanies new technology, like UFO sightings in the 1950s. If ever it is still possible to "tell" AI writing, it soon will not be. So best (IMO) just to respond to the substance of the writing and move on.
Being able to tell who wrote something doesn't imply irrationality, panicking, or a reaction to new technology.
> like UFO sightings in the 1950s.
UFO sightings stayed confined to the 1950s and were a reaction to new technology?
Or were the UFO sightings in the 1950s the only UFO sightings that were a reaction to new technology?
I'm not sure how this being clarified will be able to explain how identifying the writer of text is the same as a UFO sighting in 1950, but I'm open to it, I try to stay rigorously rational (c.f. X does not imply Y in first pull quote)
> If ever it is still possible to "tell" AI writing, it soon will not be.
Why not?
n.b. I quit my job at Google to build an AI client and have been working on it full time for 3 years. I love AI. I don't think there's a rational argument that justifies the idea it's better to never opine the author of some writing was AI, and the arguments offered here are particularly weak, at their face. As an opinion, solely? Fair enough.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your DNS provider can obtain a TLS certificate for your domain and cryptographically impersonate https://yourdomain.tld It's not exactly the same thing but it's close.
Still not the same thing as in the article. Server side TLS certificates are widely understood to be tied to the current owner of the domain. In a social protocol or context, I would expect a private key to be in the private control of the individual, such as when someone uses their private key to sign an email or git commit. The purpose of signing your emails or commits is to provide a good indicator that it actuall…
I do agree they're not the same but the trust and risk are very similar.
Who owns your domain name? Hint: it’s probably not you. Your hosting provider could take down your domain, or even steal traffic and direct it to their own IPs
Yes you do own your domain, as much as you can own your house. Your hosting provider can only take down your hosting, not your domain. Seizing domain names isn't very common. And by the way, with Web3 domains, you have full ownership via your own private key, with no need to pay rent. Is it possible to lose your house that you own? Yes. It's far more rare to lose a domain you own, by it being seized. DNSSec is used t…
Uh, no.
I can legally shoot and kill intruders due to castle doctrine and stand your ground laws in my physical home. And legal invasions require being in front of a judge and a search warrant.
A domain can be seized for 'terms of service' (aka kangaroo court) reasons. Stand your ground nor castle doctrine doesn't apply to your digital house.