174
Google pulls the plug on uBlock Origin, leaving over 30 million Chrome users susceptible to intrusive ads
(www.windowscentral.com)
this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2024
174 points (98.9% liked)
technology
23303 readers
486 users here now
On the road to fully automated luxury gay space communism.
Spreading Linux propaganda since 2020
- Ways to run Microsoft/Adobe and more on Linux
- The Ultimate FOSS Guide For Android
- Great libre software on Windows
- Hey you, the lib still using Chrome. Read this post!
Rules:
- 1. Obviously abide by the sitewide code of conduct. Bigotry will be met with an immediate ban
- 2. This community is about technology. Offtopic is permitted as long as it is kept in the comment sections
- 3. Although this is not /c/libre, FOSS related posting is tolerated, and even welcome in the case of effort posts
- 4. We believe technology should be liberating. As such, avoid promoting proprietary and/or bourgeois technology
- 5. Explanatory posts to correct the potential mistakes a comrade made in a post of their own are allowed, as long as they remain respectful
- 6. No crypto (Bitcoin, NFT, etc.) speculation, unless it is purely informative and not too cringe
- 7. Absolutely no tech bro shit. If you have a good opinion of Silicon Valley billionaires please manifest yourself so we can ban you.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
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
In every frame, easily identifiable by a shitty pinhole camera though?
I updated my comment with more details
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.
I feel like if you just slightly turn up the compression ratio then all that nuance is lost making the watermark nonexistent or unusable
Yes especially since Netflix in particular has atrocious compression.
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.
Quotin'
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.