No API, they sign the tokens with the government's private key and you verify them with the government's public key
If discord needs to contact an API, then the government can associate the token with you, and you with discord, and know what you browse online. No thank you.
> Key privacy protections of Discord’s age-assurance approach include:
> On-device processing: Video selfies for facial age estimation never leave a user’s device.
> Quick deletion: Identity documents submitted to our vendor partners are deleted quickly— in most cases, immediately after age confirmation.
> Straightforward verification: In most cases, users complete the process once and their Discord experience adapts to their verified age group. Users may be asked to use multiple methods only when more information is needed to assign an age group.
> Private status: A user’s age verification status cannot be seen by other users.
Discord is an app that's so routinely reverse-engineered there are projects with a million+ users designed around patching changes to it, straight in the binary.
Of course discord has no track record of overextending their privacy policy and selling data you would not expect (sarcasm).
For example but not limited to "programs you run and other system specific information". I believe I read a while back they recorded titles of all opened windows but I can't seem to find a reference for that.
I'm not saying they won't ever start collecting it and selling it. I'm saying the day they do, it will be laid out in their privacy policy. Right now they're making statements that they're not even collecting it.
> secretly selling your IDs data behind your back, they have to account for that revenue in their books, put it in their privacy policies or do it illegally, it's weak to whistleblowers, third parties get breached all the time (as well as yourself), and you have to trust the people you're selling this to. It's not credible.
While what GP said was not worded how the site rules say it should be, your original point is very tedious and can only be read charitably if we assume you never read any news or barely retain anything. We are currently on a news website. I think if you want non-commenting readers to see your point and have charitable thoughts of you it would help to explain why you're ignoring reality for whatever it is you are positing (consumer protections because of subscriptions? really? for this corporation?).
What you're saying in this post essentially just underlines GPs point, which I imagine isn't what you're trying to communicate. You have to help a reader understand your point of view, especially if it's far removed from objective reality (which is that a corporate entity will betray you for money, regardless of whether that makes sense long-term).
Nope, when corporate overlords sell your data they say it in their terms of use and privacy policies because no one is that stupid. If Discord says they're not selling that data, they're not selling that data. The day they'll start doing it, they'll put it in their policy.
You're making up a reality that doesn't exist in your head and claiming it's the truth.
You have in your head examples like facebook or spotify. Spoiler: They tell you exactly with what sauce you're gonna be eaten
Discord had a scandal not too long ago where pictures of people/passports were stolen. There they said that they delete those files immediately after processing them. This proves your statement as false.
Are you saying that corporations respect the letter of the law when it comes to privacy? They don't, they can just drop some lunch money when caught red-handed [0]
Even when they write in their privacy policy that they collect private data and sell them to third parties, unlawfully, that does not make it any better. Cambridge Analytica was operating with respect to Facebook policies. Would you say that people that took an IQ test and were manipulated into voting pro-Brexit were well-aware of the sauce they were eaten with?
Discord is unfortunately no different, they're profit-driven and likely to sell user data already or in the future, because it's incredibly easy and profitable to do so. Why would a chat app try and predict its users' gender? [1]
BetterDiscord is more... client modding to enable userscripts. Vencord is actually running find-and-replace on Discord's Webpack modules to implement deeper integrations. They're far more reverse-engineering than BetterDiscord's monkey-patching.
Oh hey Direwolf I've contributed some stuff to your mods.
You mean if they lied about just the IDs but not the faces? The paragraph quoted mentions that the verification is done client side, "never leaves your device".
If we admit that they're saying they won't store it, then secretly selling your IDs data behind your back, they have to account for that revenue in their books, put it in their privacy policies or do it illegally, it's weak to whistleblowers, third parties get breached all the time (as well as yourself), and you have to trust the people you're selling this to. It's not credible.
There's similar debates with Whatsapp and their E2E encryption. Read this
Right, because that never happened to discord or any other multibillion VC fueled company that offers its services for free. See also meta repeatedly lying about absolutely anything that has to do with privacy.
> If they tell you they're not selling your data they're not selling your data.
Oh you naive child. /s
If they tell you they are not selling your data, its because they have a license agreement with another company which is selling your data. 'They' very specifically arent selling it, however they are very much profitting from other companies using it.
For anyone outside the U.S where most likely people around you will have Android devices and not iPhones, you are better off ordering trackers that are compatible with Google Find My Device
They're cheaper and allows third parties, plus the network is stronger.
They're cheaper and allows third parties, plus the network is stronger.
There are cheap ($5) devices for Apple's network, if you don't need the UWB support (required for precise location, e.g. when you're within metres of the device but don't know which direction you should go).
I wonder which network is stronger in the UK. There are many recent-ish Android phones with presumably the latest version of Google Play Services. But I don't know if anyone has tried to test, or even to estimate the number of devices.
>I've tried asking Claude to optimize it further, it created a plan that looks reasonable (I've never interacted with Rust in my life) and it spent a day building many of these optimizations but at the end of the day, none of them actually improved the runtime and some even made it way worse.
This is the kind of thing where if this was a real developer tweaking a codebase they're familiar with, it could get done, but with AI there's a glass ceiling
Yeah, I had Claude spend a lot of time optimizing a JS bundling config (as a quite senior frontend) and it started some things that looked insanely promising, which a newer FE dev would be thrilled about.
I later realized it sped up the metric I'd asked about (build time) at the cost of all users downloading like 100x the amount of JS.
I just ran into the problem of extremely slow uploads in an app I was working on. Told Gemini to work on it, and it tried to get the timing of everything, then tried to optimize the slow parts of the code. After a long time, there might have been some improvements, but the basic problem remained: 5-10 seconds to upload an image from the same machine. Increasing the chunk size fixed the problem immediately.
Even though the other optimizations might have been ok, some of them made things more complicated, so I reverted all of them.
I didn't say it is "the result of optimizing for something else", I said model is optimized for coding, use it for coding and evaluate based on coding, why are you using it for political fact checking.
when do we stop this kind of polarization? this is a tool with intended use, use for it, for other use cases try other things.
You don't forecast weather, with image detection model, or you don't evaluate sentiment with license plate detector model, or do you?
When the tool isn't polarized. I wouldn't use a wrench with an objectionable symbol on it.
> You don't forecast weather with image detection model
What do you do with a large language model? I think most people put language in and get language out. Plenty of people are going to look askance at statements like "the devil is really good at coding, so let's use him for that only". Do you think it should be illegal/not allowed to not hire a person because they have political beliefs you don't like?
Neither is the bias and censorship exhibited in models from Western labs. The point is that this evaluation is pointless. If it's mission critical for you to have that specific fact available to the model then there are multiple ways to augment or ablate this knowledge gap/refusal.
Probably very clear-cut, right? "No parking, no business" never made sense, but it makes even less sense in a city where cars are involved in less than a third of all trips
Especially considering that
* Congestion is an opportunity cost in itself already, which is paid in wasted time by all road users, impacting mostly those who spend a long time on the road, which is busses, taxis, professionals and delivery drivers, as they spend the most amount of time actually driving in congested roads
* Congestion pricing forces trips to self-select on cost/benefits in actual dollars, instead of time, so you optimize for wealthier trip takers, short stays or high value trips, where before you would favor long stays (which make looking for parking forever not so bad), and people who don't value their time very much
* Car use remains heavily subsidized, as motorists do not come close to paying the full costs associated with their road usage
>We need as many checks as possible - and ideally ones that come for free (e.g., guaranteed by types, lifetimes, etc.) - which is why Rust might be the language for vibe coding.
Checking preconditions and postconditions is much easier to do for a human than checking an implementation
The thing that would really make sense is a proved language like Coq or Promela
You can then really just leave the implementation to the AI.
If discord needs to contact an API, then the government can associate the token with you, and you with discord, and know what you browse online. No thank you.
reply