• 1 Post
  • 204 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 6th, 2023

help-circle



  • ToS was the wrong term. Artists agree to a contract when they monetize their content on Spotify. The contract specifies exactly what the artist will be paid for. If the artist was misrepresenting facts in order to be paid more than the contract would otherwise stipulate, it’s called fraud, and that is a crime.

    Artificial streams are not new. Spotify has many articles dedicated to describing the problem of artificial streams, and the penalties for artists engaging in it. Here are One, Two, Three of them just from a single search.

    This is a loophole in the same way that taking stuff when the owner isn’t looking is a loophole. In other words, it’s just called a crime.


  • It’s not a loophole, though. Their ToS specifically prohibits creating artificial streams. The guy isn’t going to get away with it. The AI generated music isn’t a problem, but spinning up bots to give it streams is the same as using click bots to farm ad revenue. If the man catches you, the man’s gonna win.

    Vulfpeck made a silent album and asked fans to stream it nonstop. THAT was a loophole, because there wasn’t anything spotify could do, there wasn’t anything in their agreement that said they couldn’t do that, and that’s awesome. Spotify (and the others I assume) has since plugged that hole, but I applaud them for taking advantage while they could.

    Yeah, I have to think there are others out there doing this same thing at a smaller scale, being more subtle about it, and not getting caught. This guy just got a bit too greedy.


  • I think this was Steve Jobs’ primary skill. He could see a clear vision of the product people didn’t know they wanted. Bottom to top, from the hardware to run on, to the typeface their apps used; he knew that the best user experiences happened when every level of the stack harmonized to create a very finely tuned user experience.

    Unfortunately, the people who are that good usually don’t work for free. We’re very fortunate that Valve is choosing to open source their work and keep their SteamDeck platform an open one.





  • Dumpster fire or not, it doesn’t let you actually see recent posts unless you’re signed in anymore. So all the public services that use it (or Facebook) to make public statements are inaccessible.

    IMO the US should start a .gov mastodon instance for these types of accounts. Moderation might be a challenge given that there’s a fine line between censorship on a private platform, and infringement of free speech on a publicly funded one, but I think we’ll need to figure it out eventually.






  • As someone who majored in CS and is now in a software engineering position, the people in tech who come from a completely different field are always my favorite. On top of just proving people wrong about the “right” way to get into the field, they’ve been around, they know how to think about problems from other perspectives, and they’re usually better at working with other people.

    Honestly, I think more people should minor in CS, or if they did their undergrad in CS, they should have to do their grad work in something else. The ability to compute things is only useful if you’re well versed in a problem worth computing an answer to, most of which lie outside of CS.


  • I’m actually not sure what TPM can guard against, but I think you’re right, I think if a malicious OS borked with the bootloader, TPM would catch it and complain before you decrypt the other OS.

    Yeah, physical access usually means all bets are off, but you still lock your doors even though a hammer through a window easily circumvents it. Because you don’t know what the attacker is willing to do/capable of. If you only ever check for physical devices, you’ll miss the attack in software, similarly if you only rely on Secure Boot you’ll miss any hardware based attacks. It’s there as a tool to plug one attack vector.

    Also, my guess is the most common thing this protects against are stupid employees plugging a USB they found in the parking lot into their PC. If they do it while the OS is running, IT can have a policy that blocks it from taking action. But if they leave it there during a reboot, IT is otherwise helpless.


  • No point in putting locks on your house, because an attacker can just drive their car through your front door.

    The attacks you mention have their own ways of being detected: usually eyeballs. But eyeballs can’t help you against something hiding in your bootloader. So Secure Boot was made.

    And I don’t really follow your dual boot claim. If you don’t trust one of the OSes, and you boot it up on your hw, you’re already hosed. At that point it can backdoor your bootloader and compromise your other OS. Secure Boot prevents malicious OSes from being booted, it can’t help you if you willingly boot a malicious OS.