*Fighting Words* - new Razor 1911 demo, celebrating 40 years in c/piracy@lemmy.ml

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 hour ago

thanks, i edited the post to link that instead

3

Fighting Words - new Razor 1911 demo, celebrating 40 years (www.youtube.com)

submitted 2 hours ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) by cypherpunks@lemmy.ml to c/piracy@lemmy.ml

2 comments fedilink

released at Revision 2026

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Razor_1911

What actually is the 10-point proposal from Iran which Trump said is a "workable basis on which to negotiate"? in c/nostupidquestions@lemmy.world

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml -1 points 16 hours ago

You asked a question and answered it yourself?

I posted the 10 points according to one source and then said

There are many varied but similar versions of these points circulating elsewhere

28

What is the 10-point proposal from Iran which Trump said is a "workable basis on which to negotiate"? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by cypherpunks@lemmy.ml to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml

0 comments fedilink

The US must fundamentally commit to guaranteeing non-aggression.
Continuation of Iran’s control over the Strait of Hormuz.
Acceptance that Iran can enrich uranium for its nuclear program
Removal of all primary sanctions on Iran.
Removal of all secondary sanctions against foreign entities that do business with Iranian institutions).
End of all United Security Council resolutions targeting Iran.
End of all International Atomic Energy Agency resolutions on Iran’s nuclear program.
Compensation payment to Iran for war damage.
Withdrawal of US combat forces from the region.
Cease-fire on all fronts, including Israel’s conflict with Hezbollah in Lebanon.

... are the 10 points, according to https://gulfbusiness.com/en/2026/iran/iran-10-point-plan-war-us-israel-trump-hormuz/

There are many varied but similar versions of these points circulating elsewhere:

Here are two of Trump's recent posts about it:

Xenia rule in c/onehundredninetysix@lemmy.blahaj.zone

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 day ago

Why is the pipe required tho?

it isn't really. what is required for it to consume memory very rapidly is for each invocation of the function to call itself more than once. using the pipe is just one way to do this; it would work just as well if the pipe were replaced with an &

57

3.255 famous hot dogs per wiener dog (lemmy.ml)

submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by cypherpunks@lemmy.ml to c/anythingbutmetric@discuss.tchncs.de

13 comments fedilink

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/45638721

screenshot is of https://www.nytimes.com/live/2026/04/06/science/nasa-artemis-ii-moon-lunar-flyby/717b8b89-e5fb-5159-8994-f1288c58cdf1

252,756 miles is 406,771 km, btw

9

3.255 famous hot dogs per wiener dog (lemmy.ml)

submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by cypherpunks@lemmy.ml to c/anythingbutmetric@lemmy.ml

2 comments fedilink

screenshot is of https://www.nytimes.com/live/2026/04/06/science/nasa-artemis-ii-moon-lunar-flyby/717b8b89-e5fb-5159-8994-f1288c58cdf1

252,756 miles is 406,771 km, btw

Xenia rule in c/onehundredninetysix@lemmy.blahaj.zone

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 22 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

:(){ :|:& };: is a classic fork bomb for bash and other shells which allow : as a function name.

running it will likely cause your system to need to be rebooted.

GraphiteOS is an unofficial, unaffiliated fork of GrapheneOS packaged as a Generic System Image (GSI) for Project Treble devices in c/android@lemmy.world

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I didn’t say that they should be thrown away?

Sorry that I interpreted your comment as suggesting that anything less than a Pixel is not worth trying to improve the security of.

What’s with the hostility?

No hostility intended. But I still don't understand why you think that omitting Graphene's Pixel-requiring hardening features would cause Graphite to be less secure than other Android distributions which also lack those features.

GraphiteOS is an unofficial, unaffiliated fork of GrapheneOS packaged as a Generic System Image (GSI) for Project Treble devices in c/android@lemmy.world

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml -1 points 2 days ago

Are there any other options with a feature set comparable to GrapheneOS(-minus-pixel-only-hardening-features) ?

104

YouTube notifies folk musician "You are now sharing revenues with the copyright owners of the music detected in your video" after an AI company cloned her voice & claimed ownership of her recordings (www.theverge.com)

submitted 2 days ago by cypherpunks@lemmy.ml to c/latestagecapitalism@lemmy.world

6 comments fedilink

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/45607884

article text
A folk musician became a target for AI fakes and a copyright troll

Murphy Campbell plays public domain ballads, but YouTube accepted the copyright claim anyway.

by Terrence O'Brien

Apr 4, 2026, 5:52 PM GMT

In January, folk artist Murphy Campbell discovered several songs on her Spotify profile that did not belong there. They were songs that she had recorded, but she’d never uploaded them to Spotify, and something was off about the vocals.

She quickly surmised that someone had pulled performances of the songs she posted to YouTube, created AI covers, and uploaded them to streaming platforms under her name. I ran one of the songs, “Four Marys”, through two different AI detectors, and it seemed to support her suspicions with both saying it was probably AI-generated.

Campbell was shocked, “I was kind of under the impression that we had a little bit more checks in place before someone could just do that. But, you know, a lesson learned there,” she told The Verge. It took some time before Campbell managed to get the fake songs removed, “I became a pest,” she said. And even then, it wasn’t a complete victory. While the offending tracks don’t appear to be available on YouTube Music or Apple Music anymore, at least one can still be found on Spotify, just under a different artist profile, but with the same name. There are now multiple Murphy Campbells — “Obviously, I was thrilled by that,” the real Murphy Campbell said.

Spotify is testing a new system that would allow artists to manually approve songs before they appear on their profile, but Campbell is skeptical after being burned. “I feel like, every time, an entity that’s that large makes a promise like that to musicians. It seems to just not be what they made it out to be, but I’ll be curious to try it out in the future,” she said.

This was just the beginning of Campbell’s nightmare, however.

On the day that a Rolling Stone article was published, discussing Campbell’s brush with AI imitators, a series of videos were uploaded to YouTube through distributor Vydia. Those videos have not been posted publicly, and it’s unclear if anyone other than the uploader, who goes by Murphy Rider, has seen them. YouTube declined to comment for this story.

Those were used to claim ownership of the material in several of Murphy Campbell’s videos. Campbell received a notice from YouTube reading: “You are now sharing revenues with the copyright owners of the music detected in your video, Darling Corey.” The most confusing part, the songs at the center of these claims are all in the public domain, including the classic “In the Pines,” which dates back to at least the 1870s and has been covered by everyone from Lead Belly to Nirvana (as “Where Did You Sleep Last Night”).

Vydia has since released those claims, and spokesperson Roy LaManna says the person who uploaded the videos has been banned from their platform. Of the over 6,000,000 claims filed by Vydia through YouTube’s Content ID system, 0.02 percent were found to be invalid, which LaManna says is, “by industry standards is like amazing.” Continuing, “we pride ourselves on doing this the right way.”

LaManna also says that Vydia has no connection to Timeless IR or the AI covers that were uploaded to streaming platforms under Campbell’s name. While the timing is certainly suspicious, LaManna says the two incidents are separate.

Vydia has received a lot of blowback including, LaManna says, “literal death threats” which have led to the offices being evacuated. Campbell isn’t about to let Vydia off the hook, but notes that it’s not solely to blame. The worlds of generative AI, music distribution, and copyright are complex with multiple points of failure and opportunities for abuse. “I think it goes way deeper than we think it does,” Campbell says.

you can hear some of her music here: https://murphycampbell.bandcamp.com/album/murphy-campbell

50

YouTube notifies folk musician "You are now sharing revenues with the copyright owners of the music detected in your video" after an AI company cloned her voice & claimed ownership of her recordings (www.theverge.com)

submitted 2 days ago by cypherpunks@lemmy.ml to c/latestagecapitalism@lemmygrad.ml

4 comments fedilink

article text

A folk musician became a target for AI fakes and a copyright troll

Murphy Campbell plays public domain ballads, but YouTube accepted the copyright claim anyway.

by Terrence O'Brien

Apr 4, 2026, 5:52 PM GMT

In January, folk artist Murphy Campbell discovered several songs on her Spotify profile that did not belong there. They were songs that she had recorded, but she’d never uploaded them to Spotify, and something was off about the vocals.

She quickly surmised that someone had pulled performances of the songs she posted to YouTube, created AI covers, and uploaded them to streaming platforms under her name. I ran one of the songs, “Four Marys”, through two different AI detectors, and it seemed to support her suspicions with both saying it was probably AI-generated.

Campbell was shocked, “I was kind of under the impression that we had a little bit more checks in place before someone could just do that. But, you know, a lesson learned there,” she told The Verge. It took some time before Campbell managed to get the fake songs removed, “I became a pest,” she said. And even then, it wasn’t a complete victory. While the offending tracks don’t appear to be available on YouTube Music or Apple Music anymore, at least one can still be found on Spotify, just under a different artist profile, but with the same name. There are now multiple Murphy Campbells — “Obviously, I was thrilled by that,” the real Murphy Campbell said.

Spotify is testing a new system that would allow artists to manually approve songs before they appear on their profile, but Campbell is skeptical after being burned. “I feel like, every time, an entity that’s that large makes a promise like that to musicians. It seems to just not be what they made it out to be, but I’ll be curious to try it out in the future,” she said.

This was just the beginning of Campbell’s nightmare, however.

On the day that a Rolling Stone article was published, discussing Campbell’s brush with AI imitators, a series of videos were uploaded to YouTube through distributor Vydia. Those videos have not been posted publicly, and it’s unclear if anyone other than the uploader, who goes by Murphy Rider, has seen them. YouTube declined to comment for this story.

Those were used to claim ownership of the material in several of Murphy Campbell’s videos. Campbell received a notice from YouTube reading: “You are now sharing revenues with the copyright owners of the music detected in your video, Darling Corey.” The most confusing part, the songs at the center of these claims are all in the public domain, including the classic “In the Pines,” which dates back to at least the 1870s and has been covered by everyone from Lead Belly to Nirvana (as “Where Did You Sleep Last Night”).

Vydia has since released those claims, and spokesperson Roy LaManna says the person who uploaded the videos has been banned from their platform. Of the over 6,000,000 claims filed by Vydia through YouTube’s Content ID system, 0.02 percent were found to be invalid, which LaManna says is, “by industry standards is like amazing.” Continuing, “we pride ourselves on doing this the right way.”

LaManna also says that Vydia has no connection to Timeless IR or the AI covers that were uploaded to streaming platforms under Campbell’s name. While the timing is certainly suspicious, LaManna says the two incidents are separate.

Vydia has received a lot of blowback including, LaManna says, “literal death threats” which have led to the offices being evacuated. Campbell isn’t about to let Vydia off the hook, but notes that it’s not solely to blame. The worlds of generative AI, music distribution, and copyright are complex with multiple points of failure and opportunities for abuse. “I think it goes way deeper than we think it does,” Campbell says.

you can hear some of her music here: https://murphycampbell.bandcamp.com/album/murphy-campbell

2

We found an undocumented bug in the Apollo 11 guidance computer code [cw: this is also an ad for an LLM thing] (www.juxt.pro)

submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by cypherpunks@lemmy.ml to c/space@lemmy.ml

1 comments fedilink

i hesitated to post this because it is ultimately an ad and the blog post is presumably also largely LLM-authored, but... it is also an actual newly-discovered bug in the Apollo Guidance Computer

🤷

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.bestiver.se/post/1034552

Comments

GraphiteOS is an unofficial, unaffiliated fork of GrapheneOS packaged as a Generic System Image (GSI) for Project Treble devices in c/android@lemmy.world

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 days ago (5 children)

Should the world just throw away the billions of non-Pixel devices in use today?

And/or should everyone just give up on improving security at all for the vast majority of phone users who cannot afford Pixels, since they can't ever be as secure as a Pixel?

GraphiteOS is an unofficial, unaffiliated fork of GrapheneOS packaged as a Generic System Image (GSI) for Project Treble devices in c/android@lemmy.world

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml -1 points 2 days ago (7 children)

see my other comment in this thread

GraphiteOS is an unofficial, unaffiliated fork of GrapheneOS packaged as a Generic System Image (GSI) for Project Treble devices in c/android@lemmy.world

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

those benefits rely on the Pixel’s hardware

Doesn't GrapheneOS have a lot of benefits besides the 3 pixel-requiring hardening features which are removed in Graphite (and the 3 others which are disabled by default but can be re-enabled on some devices)?

I'm not disputing that those hardening features are worthwhile! Pixels with Graphene are obviously much more difficult to exploit than phones without those features.

But there are billions of non-Pixel phones in the world which aren't about to be thrown away, and the vast majority of phone users absolutely cannot afford a Pixel. GraphiteOS (if it actually works?) seems to me like it is probably a major improvement over the other options available for them.

GraphiteOS is an unofficial, unaffiliated fork of GrapheneOS packaged as a Generic System Image (GSI) for Project Treble devices in c/android@lemmy.world

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 days ago (9 children)

At that point I’d just use something like Lineage

My impression is that Graphene-without-the-features-requiring-Pixel-hardware would still be a much more secure operating system than Lineage (or the other options available).