#fraud detection tools | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

treasure-mimic · 2 years ago

Text

So, let me try and put everything together here, because I really do think it needs to be talked about.

Today, Unity announced that it intends to apply a fee to use its software. Then it got worse.

For those not in the know, Unity is the most popular free to use video game development tool, offering a basic version for individuals who want to learn how to create games or create independently alongside paid versions for corporations or people who want more features. It's decent enough at this job, has issues but for the price point I can't complain, and is the idea entry point into creating in this medium, it's a very important piece of software.

But speaking of tools, the CEO is a massive one. When he was the COO of EA, he advocated for using, what out and out sounds like emotional manipulation to coerce players into microtransactions.

"A consumer gets engaged in a property, they might spend 10, 20, 30, 50 hours on the game and then when they're deep into the game they're well invested in it. We're not gouging, but we're charging and at that point in time the commitment can be pretty high."

He also called game developers who don't discuss monetization early in the planning stages of development, quote, "fucking idiots".

So that sets the stage for what might be one of the most bald-faced greediest moves I've seen from a corporation in a minute. Most at least have the sense of self-preservation to hide it.

A few hours ago, Unity posted this announcement on the official blog.

Effective January 1, 2024, we will introduce a new Unity Runtime Fee that’s based on game installs. We will also add cloud-based asset storage, Unity DevOps tools, and AI at runtime at no extra cost to Unity subscription plans this November. We are introducing a Unity Runtime Fee that is based upon each time a qualifying game is downloaded by an end user. We chose this because each time a game is downloaded, the Unity Runtime is also installed. Also we believe that an initial install-based fee allows creators to keep the ongoing financial gains from player engagement, unlike a revenue share.

Now there are a few red flags to note in this pitch immediately.

Unity is planning on charging a fee on all games which use its engine.

This is a flat fee per number of installs.

They are using an always online runtime function to determine whether a game is downloaded.

There is just so many things wrong with this that it's hard to know where to start, not helped by this FAQ which doubled down on a lot of the major issues people had.

I guess let's start with what people noticed first. Because it's using a system baked into the software itself, Unity would not be differentiating between a "purchase" and a "download". If someone uninstalls and reinstalls a game, that's two downloads. If someone gets a new computer or a new console and downloads a game already purchased from their account, that's two download. If someone pirates the game, the studio will be asked to pay for that download.

Q: How are you going to collect installs? A: We leverage our own proprietary data model. We believe it gives an accurate determination of the number of times the runtime is distributed for a given project. Q: Is software made in unity going to be calling home to unity whenever it's ran, even for enterprice licenses? A: We use a composite model for counting runtime installs that collects data from numerous sources. The Unity Runtime Fee will use data in compliance with GDPR and CCPA. The data being requested is aggregated and is being used for billing purposes. Q: If a user reinstalls/redownloads a game / changes their hardware, will that count as multiple installs? A: Yes. The creator will need to pay for all future installs. The reason is that Unity doesn’t receive end-player information, just aggregate data. Q: What's going to stop us being charged for pirated copies of our games? A: We do already have fraud detection practices in our Ads technology which is solving a similar problem, so we will leverage that know-how as a starting point. We recognize that users will have concerns about this and we will make available a process for them to submit their concerns to our fraud compliance team.

This is potentially related to a new system that will require Unity Personal developers to go online at least once every three days.

Starting in November, Unity Personal users will get a new sign-in and online user experience. Users will need to be signed into the Hub with their Unity ID and connect to the internet to use Unity. If the internet connection is lost, users can continue using Unity for up to 3 days while offline. More details to come, when this change takes effect.

It's unclear whether this requirement will be attached to any and all Unity games, though it would explain how they're theoretically able to track "the number of installs", and why the methodology for tracking these installs is so shit, as we'll discuss later.

Unity claims that it will only leverage this fee to games which surpass a certain threshold of downloads and yearly revenue.

Only games that meet the following thresholds qualify for the Unity Runtime Fee: Unity Personal and Unity Plus: Those that have made $200,000 USD or more in the last 12 months AND have at least 200,000 lifetime game installs. Unity Pro and Unity Enterprise: Those that have made $1,000,000 USD or more in the last 12 months AND have at least 1,000,000 lifetime game installs.

They don't say how they're going to collect information on a game's revenue, likely this is just to say that they're only interested in squeezing larger products (games like Genshin Impact and Honkai: Star Rail, Fate Grand Order, Among Us, and Fall Guys) and not every 2 dollar puzzle platformer that drops on Steam. But also, these larger products have the easiest time porting off of Unity and the most incentives to, meaning realistically those heaviest impacted are going to be the ones who just barely meet this threshold, most of them indie developers.

Aggro Crab Games, one of the first to properly break this story, points out that systems like the Xbox Game Pass, which is already pretty predatory towards smaller developers, will quickly inflate their "lifetime game installs" meaning even skimming the threshold of that 200k revenue, will be asked to pay a fee per install, not a percentage on said revenue.

[IMAGE DESCRIPTION: Hey Gamers!

Today, Unity (the engine we use to make our games) announced that they'll soon be taking a fee from developers for every copy of the game installed over a certain threshold - regardless of how that copy was obtained.

Guess who has a somewhat highly anticipated game coming to Xbox Game Pass in 2024? That's right, it's us and a lot of other developers.

That means Another Crab's Treasure will be free to install for the 25 million Game Pass subscribers. If a fraction of those users download our game, Unity could take a fee that puts an enormous dent in our income and threatens the sustainability of our business.

And that's before we even think about sales on other platforms, or pirated installs of our game, or even multiple installs by the same user!!!

This decision puts us and countless other studios in a position where we might not be able to justify using Unity for our future titles. If these changes aren't rolled back, we'll be heavily considering abandoning our wealth of Unity expertise we've accumulated over the years and starting from scratch in a new engine. Which is really something we'd rather not do.

On behalf of the dev community, we're calling on Unity to reverse the latest in a string of shortsighted decisions that seem to prioritize shareholders over their product's actual users.

I fucking hate it here.

-Aggro Crab - END DESCRIPTION]

That fee, by the way, is a flat fee. Not a percentage, not a royalty. This means that any games made in Unity expecting any kind of success are heavily incentivized to cost as much as possible.

[IMAGE DESCRIPTION: A table listing the various fees by number of Installs over the Install Threshold vs. version of Unity used, ranging from $0.01 to $0.20 per install. END DESCRIPTION]

Basic elementary school math tells us that if a game comes out for $1.99, they will be paying, at maximum, 10% of their revenue to Unity, whereas jacking the price up to $59.99 lowers that percentage to something closer to 0.3%. Obviously any company, especially any company in financial desperation, which a sudden anchor on all your revenue is going to create, is going to choose the latter.

Furthermore, and following the trend of "fuck anyone who doesn't ask for money", Unity helpfully defines what an install is on their main site.

While I'm looking at this page as it exists now, it currently says

The installation and initialization of a game or app on an end user’s device as well as distribution via streaming is considered an “install.” Games or apps with substantially similar content may be counted as one project, with installs then aggregated to calculate the Unity Runtime Fee.

However, I saw a screenshot saying something different, and utilizing the Wayback Machine we can see that this phrasing was changed at some point in the few hours since this announcement went up. Instead, it reads:

The installation and initialization of a game or app on an end user’s device as well as distribution via streaming or web browser is considered an “install.” Games or apps with substantially similar content may be counted as one project, with installs then aggregated to calculate the Unity Runtime Fee.

Screenshot for posterity:

That would mean web browser games made in Unity would count towards this install threshold. You could legitimately drive the count up simply by continuously refreshing the page. The FAQ, again, doubles down.

Q: Does this affect WebGL and streamed games? A: Games on all platforms are eligible for the fee but will only incur costs if both the install and revenue thresholds are crossed. Installs - which involves initialization of the runtime on a client device - are counted on all platforms the same way (WebGL and streaming included).

And, what I personally consider to be the most suspect claim in this entire debacle, they claim that "lifetime installs" includes installs prior to this change going into effect.

Will this fee apply to games using Unity Runtime that are already on the market on January 1, 2024? Yes, the fee applies to eligible games currently in market that continue to distribute the runtime. We look at a game's lifetime installs to determine eligibility for the runtime fee. Then we bill the runtime fee based on all new installs that occur after January 1, 2024.

Again, again, doubled down in the FAQ.

Q: Are these fees going to apply to games which have been out for years already? If you met the threshold 2 years ago, you'll start owing for any installs monthly from January, no? (in theory). It says they'll use previous installs to determine threshold eligibility & then you'll start owing them for the new ones. A: Yes, assuming the game is eligible and distributing the Unity Runtime then runtime fees will apply. We look at a game's lifetime installs to determine eligibility for the runtime fee. Then we bill the runtime fee based on all new installs that occur after January 1, 2024.

That would involve billing companies for using their software before telling them of the existence of a bill. Holding their actions to a contract that they performed before the contract existed!

Okay. I think that's everything. So far.

There is one thing that I want to mention before ending this post, unfortunately it's a little conspiratorial, but it's so hard to believe that anyone genuinely thought this was a good idea that it's stuck in my brain as a significant possibility.

A few days ago it was reported that Unity's CEO sold 2,000 shares of his own company.

On September 6, 2023, John Riccitiello, President and CEO of Unity Software Inc (NYSE:U), sold 2,000 shares of the company. This move is part of a larger trend for the insider, who over the past year has sold a total of 50,610 shares and purchased none.

I would not be surprised if this decision gets reversed tomorrow, that it was literally only made for the CEO to short his own goddamn company, because I would sooner believe that this whole thing is some idiotic attempt at committing fraud than a real monetization strategy, even knowing how unfathomably greedy these people can be.

So, with all that said, what do we do now?

Well, in all likelihood you won't need to do anything. As I said, some of the biggest names in the industry would be directly affected by this change, and you can bet your bottom dollar that they're not just going to take it lying down. After all, the only way to stop a greedy CEO is with a greedier CEO, right?

(I fucking hate it here.)

And that's not mentioning the indie devs who are already talking about abandoning the engine.

[Links display tweets from the lead developer of Among Us saying it'd be less costly to hire people to move the game off of Unity and Cult of the Lamb's official twitter saying the game won't be available after January 1st in response to the news.]

That being said, I'm still shaken by all this. The fact that Unity is openly willing to go back and punish its developers for ever having used the engine in the past makes me question my relationship to it.

The news has given rise to the visibility of free, open source alternative Godot, which, if you're interested, is likely a better option than Unity at this point. Mostly, though, I just hope we can get out of this whole, fucking, environment where creatives are treated as an endless mill of free profits that's going to be continuously ratcheted up and up to drive unsustainable infinite corporate growth that our entire economy is based on for some fuckin reason.

Anyways, that's that, I find having these big posts that break everything down to be helpful.

#Unity #Unity3D #Video Games #Game Development #Game Developers #fuckshit #I don't know what to tag news like this

6K notes · View notes

mfilterit · 28 days ago

Text

What Happens When You Eliminate Click Spamming – Know With Proof?

Ever celebrated a spike in installs, only to realize no one’s using your app?

You’re not alone. For every marketer chasing performance metrics, there’s a nagging truth: not all installs are created equal. In fact, a growing chunk of them might be fake, incentivized, or just plain useless.

According to our analysis, there has been a significant rise in ad fraud in apps at each level of the funnel, the highest being at the install stage. There are various sophisticated methods used by fraudsters to manipulate app installs. This includes junk installs, click spamming, and affiliate fraud—all quietly inflating your numbers while your actual ROI flatlines.

Kuku FM, one of India’s fastest-growing audio platforms, ran headfirst into this challenge. Massive install numbers. Minimal post-install activity. Skyrocketing costs with little to show for it.

But they didn’t just accept it. They fought back with the right partner and the right data.

This is the story of how Kuku FM turned fake installs into real engagement, leveraging a mobile ad fraud detection tool with their current tech stack, and reclaimed their growth narrative.

Click Spamming in USA , Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, India.

Click here to read more:

What Happens When You Eliminate Click Spamming – Know With Proof?

#click spamming #click fraud #ad fraud #ad fraud solution #fraud detection solution #fraud detection #ad fraud tool #ad fraud software #ad fraud companies

0 notes

hussyknee · 6 months ago

Text

TIL the Australian guy that put on the single greatest piece of improv theater ever caught on camera during his wrongful arrest passed away this August from cancer.

youtube

For those who don't know: in 1991 an investigator who suspected this man of credit card fraud called the cops on him at the Chinese restaurant where he was dining with a friend. To expedite the arrest, he led the police to believe they were arresting a high profile criminal of some sort.

Police surrounded the restaurant, corralled the waiting media (who had somehow gotten wind), and interrupted Karlson's lunch.

"He was as calm as anything," former police detective Adam Firman says of the moment he arrested Karlson in the restaurant.

"He was happy to go with us. Well, as happy as you can be, to be arrested. Until he saw all the media. And that's when he just went berserk."

The lines Karlson delivered have since become classic quotes in internet culture.

"Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest!" Karlson declares to the cameras as he's wrestled into the police car.

...

"As soon as we drove away, he stopped and he said, 'That was fun,'" Firman says.

"There was no fight getting him out of the car. Nothing. It was all put on for the cameras."

The drama behind the rant

The Brisbane police who arrested him that day didn't know that Karlson had been a criminal and a serial prison escapee. He was also a part-time actor.

By the time he was 34, Karlson had spent most of his life in homes and prisons.

His first escape was in 1966. He was on a train going from Boggo Road Gaol to face a breaking, entering and stealing charge at Maryborough Magistrates Court. He got out of his handcuffs and jumped off.

Two years later, after he had been locked up in McLeod Prison Farm on Victoria's French Island for another theft, he convinced a local fisherman to give him a lift to the mainland.

Three months after that, he was picked up in a stolen car carrying safe-breaking tools in Parramatta. Just before his trial, he impersonated a detective and walked out of his court cell. Finally, he was captured in an apartment on Sydney's North Shore.

That's when his life took a dramatic left turn.

Sentenced to eight years in Parramatta Gaol, Karlson was put in an unusually large cell with an inmate named Jim McNeil.

This chance encounter would become destiny manifest.

McNeil had heard about Karlson impersonating a detective, and he thought it was hilarious.

He welcomed Karlson into his cell. The two men bonded over making foul-tasting alcohol in the cell's washbasin from raisins and yeast, and shared histories.

They had both grown up poor, even by the standards of their rough-and-tumble neighbourhoods. Adults had abused them physically and sexually. And they'd both stolen and scammed a few shillings for their families when they saw the chance.

After encouragement from Karlson, McNeil wrote a play about cellmates who brewed grog. They put it on in prison, and Karlson played a leading role.

Both had discovered talents they didn't know they had. McNeil kept writing on his smuggled typewriter, and Karlson kept acting. The plays became a hit among young Sydney intellectuals, many who had been campaigning for prisoners' rights.

Within four years, their work got them out on parole a combined 13 years early.

Best friends

Karlson and McNeil's friendship continued outside the prison gates and they moved into a house in Richmond together.

The two men stuck out like sore thumbs in their new-found scene of artists and intellectuals.

Neither man had set foot in a theatre, but McNeil's plays were already being performed across Australia. He felt that, with the success of his plays, he'd never need to resort to crime again. On radio and in the press, he would give didactic rants about the brutality of the justice system.

Karlson, meanwhile, got parts in the prime-time crime dramas Homicide and Matlock Police.

They remained close.

"The lovely bloke. I love him," McNeil told an interviewer around the same time Karlson named his son Jim McNeil Karlson.

Karlson described them as best friends.

But McNeil's alcoholism killed him in 1982.

Karlson couldn't travel to the funeral in Sydney for legal reasons.

"I … with a bodgie [fake identity], booked up hundreds and hundreds of dollars worth of flowers and wreaths," he says.

Final days

McNeil's plays weren't subtle. They were screeds aimed at a society that arrested and tormented unfortunate men for petty crimes.

"The message is: look what you're doing to people," he told one interviewer.

He went on to tell a story about an Aboriginal cellmate. "He was illiterate, he was poor. He had nothing. And he stole thruppence ha'penny. And then he got three and a half years. That's a penny a year.

"Prison is the best way to show what's wrong with the outside."

His final play was about two cellmates in Parramatta. He named it 'Jack', and finished it in a drunken haze.

"Do you know I'm here?" shouts Jack the character. "Do you give a f*** where I am? No. No, you don't give a f*** where I am. Pricks. Democrats."

Fifteen years later, Jack Karlson declared "Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest!" to the waiting cameras and an enduring audience.

It would be his most unforgettable performance.

From 7news:

So how did Karlson improvise a performance so poetic, so theatrical and so amusing?

“Of course, I was somewhat influenced by the juice of the red grape."

Karlson spent his last years as a painter, incidentally selling many paintings of his own infamous arrest, and helping make a documentary about his life that's yet to be released. He died aged 82, surrounded by family and was widely mourned.

"Tata and farewell" legend. Hope the internet never forgets you. ACAB forever.

#jack karlson #this narrates in my head whenever i stuff my cats in the carrier to take them to the vet #'I'm under WHAT? What is the charge?? Eating a meal? a succulent fish meal??'#'gentlemen this is democracy meownifest!'#also always deeply freaked out by how much he looks like my Dad #complete with Type A Main Character Personality 😂#memes #funny #australia #laugh tag #wtf news #knee of huss #Youtube

133 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 1 month ago

Text

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has canceled plans to introduce new rules designed to limit the ability of US data brokers to sell sensitive information about Americans, including financial data, credit history, and Social Security numbers.

The CFPB proposed the new rule in early December under former director Rohit Chopra, who said the changes were necessary to combat commercial surveillance practices that “threaten our personal safety and undermine America’s national security.”

The agency quietly withdrew the proposal on Tuesday morning, publishing a notice in the Federal Register declaring the rule no longer “necessary or appropriate.”

The CFPB received more than 600 comments from the public this year concerning the proposal, titled Protecting Americans from Harmful Data Broker Practices. The rule was crafted to ensure that data brokers obtain Americans’ consent before selling or sharing sensitive personal information, including financial data such as income. US credit agencies are already required to abide by such regulations under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, one of the nation’s oldest privacy laws.

In its notice, the CFPB’s acting director, Russell Vought, wrote that he was withdrawing the proposal “in light of updates to Bureau policies,” and that it did not align with the agency’s “current interpretation of the FCRA,” which he added the CFPB is “in the process of revising.”

The CFPB did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Data brokers operate within a multibillion-dollar industry built on the collection and sale of detailed personal information—often without individuals’ knowledge or consent. These companies create extensive profiles on nearly every American, including highly sensitive data such as precise location history, political affiliations, and religious beliefs. This information is frequently resold for purposes ranging from marketing to law enforcement surveillance.

Many people are unaware that data brokers even exist, let alone that their personal information is being traded. In January, the Texas Attorney General’s Office, led by attorney general Ken Paxton, accused Arity—a data broker owned by Allstate—of unlawfully collecting, using, and selling driving data from over 45 million Americans to insurance companies without their consent.

The harms from data brokers can be severe–even violent. The Safety Net Project, part of the National Network to End Domestic Violence, warns that people-search websites, which compile information from data brokers, can serve as tools for abusers to track down information about their victims.

Last year, Gravy Analytics—which processes billions of location signals daily—suffered a data breach that may have exposed the movements of millions of individuals, including politicians and military personnel.

“Russell Vought is undoing years of painstaking, bipartisan work in order to prop up data brokers’ predatory, and profitable, surveillance of Americans,” says Sean Vitka, executive director of Demand Progress, a nonprofit that supported the rule. Added Vitka: “By withdrawing the CFPB’s data broker rulemaking, the Trump administration is ensuring that Americans will continue to be bombarded by scam texts, calls and emails, and that military members and their families can be targeted by spies and blackmailers.”

Vought, who also serves as director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, received a letter on Monday from the Financial Technology Association (FTA) calling for the rule to be withdrawn, claiming the rules exceed the agency’s statutory mandate and would be “harmful to financial institutions’ efforts to detect and prevent fraud.” The FTA is a US-based trade organization that represents the interests of banks, lenders, payment platforms, and their executives.

Privacy advocates have long pressed regulators to use the Fair Credit Reporting Act to crack down on the data broker industry. Common Defense, a veteran-led nonprofit, urged the CFPB to take action in November, blaming data brokers for recklessly exposing sensitive information about US service members that placed them at “substantial risk” of being blackmailed, scammed, or targeted by hostile foreign actors.

A 2023 study cited by the group—funded by the US Military Academy at West Point—concluded that the current data broker ecosystem is a threat to US national security, permitting the sale of sensitive personal data that can be used not only to identify service members and “other politically sensitive targets,” but also to offer details about medical conditions, financial problems, and political and religious beliefs. “Foreign and malign actors with access to these datasets could uncover information about high-level targets, such as military service members, that could be used for coercion, reputational damage, and blackmail,” the authors report.

Common Defense political director Naveed Shah, an Iraq War veteran, condemned the move to spike the proposed changes, accusing Vought of putting the profits of data brokers before the safety of millions of service members. "For the sake of military families and our national security, the administration must reverse course and ensure that these critical privacy protections are enacted," Shah says.

Investigations by WIRED have shown that data brokers have collected and made cheaply available information that can be used to reliably track the locations of American military and intelligence personnel overseas, including in and around sensitive installations where US nuclear weapons are reportedly stored.

WIRED reported in February that US data brokers were using Google's ad-tech tools to sell access to information about devices linked to military service members and national security decisionmakers, as well as federal contractors that manufacture and export classified defense-related technologies. Experts say it proves trivial for foreign adversaries to de-anonymize the data.

"Data brokers inflict severe harm on individuals by degrading privacy, threatening national security, enabling scams and fraud, endangering public officials and survivors of domestic violence, and putting immigrant populations at risk,” says Caroline Kraczon, law fellow at the Electronic Privacy Information Center focused on consumer protection.

“The CFPB had a critical opportunity to address these harms by clarifying that data brokers must follow the Fair Credit Reporting Act,” adds Kraczon. “This withdrawal is deeply disappointing and another attack in the administration’s war against consumers on behalf of corporate interests."

Last month, more than 1,400 CFPB employees had their positions at the agency terminated, leaving the agency with a staff of around 300 people. Elon Musk, whose so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has spearheaded the White House's efforts to radically restructure the federal government by slashing the size of its workforce, last November called on President Donald Trump to “delete” the CFPB, whose job includes shielding Americans from predatory lending practices.

61 notes · View notes

fancyfeathers · 9 months ago

Note

I was wondering this for a while, who would most likely desire a darling like Dazai but female out of the Moriarty brothers, also if you consider the light novels the mental abilities of Bsd verse far surpass the MP verse, so the character with Dazai's level of intellence and his persona.

Okay so I deep dived into reading about Dazai cause I am already a huge BSD fan (Paul Verlaine is the best character and I will fight someone on this) and while Dazai is undoubtedly a genius, he is not quite as smart as say William or Mycroft, he is probably in between Sherlock and William. If you set it in perspective he seems smarter because of the times the mangas/animes take place, Moriarty the Patriot taking place in the Victorian Era while Bungou Stray Dogs is set in modern day (2010s-2020s), so it makes sense how Dazai would seem smarter because he has access to quite a few more modern tools while William does not. There is also the fact that Dazai is written to be this smart mentor character rather than the main character so there is a mysterious feeling to him that adds to the genius appearance.

Anyway continuing on lol

Also for reference I’m going to be using more ADA Dazai for reference, like after all the stuff in the PM happened

The answer is William, because it is pretty obvious that William has a thing for energetic genius detectives when you look at his interactions with Sherlock. He probably meets his darling when she gets hired via her detective agency to investigate a disappearance of one of his students or something similar, similar to what happened to Lucian, something that would also catch William’s attention. They would not talk, he would just see her out of the corner of his eye, walking about campus. Then when he looks into her and the disappearance he finds out that she is a detective from a well known agency who was hired to look into the disappearance by the family of the student. He did not even speak to her until the student was found and the case was closed, she found the student, but he was the one who put an end to the one who kidnapped them in the first place, the other making the other’s job even more difficult. He would play the role of worrying professor and thank her for saving his student, and drops the question…

“I wonder how you understand criminal activity so well? You found him so quickly, it is quite remarkable.”

He looked into her, digging as deep as he could to see if she would be an issue, similar to what he did with Sherlock. Sure to find out she was a detective with a high intelligence level with self sacrificing tendencies was easy, but it took a bit of help from Albert and perhaps asking Mycroft for a favor to find out about her past…

138 counts of conspiracy to murder…

312 counts of extortion…

625 counts of assorted fraud and other crime…

She was an executive of a criminal organization during her youth and now she deserted them to turn a new leaf. Honestly they are an enigma even to William, so he begins to keep tabs on her, having Moran or Bonde staking out near her agency and having one of them or Fred follow her when she breaks from her normal pattern of working at her agency’s office or going on certain cases. He will even find one of her colleagues whom she mentors and ask the young boy about her.

“Hm? You want to know about her, well she found me when I was kicked out of my orphanage, she is a bit of an odd one but she and the agency took me in when no one else would.”

Eventually he follows her himself one day when she is leaving work, but he certainly did not expect to find her visiting a grave. William pieces it together that she is one of the only people who visits this grave and takes care of it. She just turns over her shoulder to look at him with a smile.

“Hello Professor Moriarty, I was wondering when you were going to follow me yourself rather than having your colleagues do it.”

She knew he was following her this whole time and he sits with her at the grave in silence for a bit, waiting for her to say something, to explain what she is doing here and of course she catches on and answers before he even needs to ask.

“The person buried here was my first friend, when he died he encouraged me to do something meaningful and help other people instead of what I was doing. He wanted me to do something good with my life and so I left. I threw out everything I had before to do something meaningful, I know it will never make up for the wrongs I have done, but it is a start and well… I really do hope the wicked can change their ways because otherwise everything I have done has been in vain and I am a disgrace to the promise I have made to him.”

In a way her words may put the world in perspective to him but he cannot stop his plans to rid the world of the class system. Then again he now has a new found respect for her that he would not dare lay a hand on her, but that being said he cannot allow her to get in the way and if push comes to shove he will deal with her as necessary, but again he respects her too much to harm her…

Taking her in…

He looks at the good she has done and unlike the nobles he has killed she has actually tried to make amends for her actions.

She has made herself a new, taking what was once was wicked in her heart and making it pure…

Her heart is a reflection of what he wants to do to this horrible world.

#william moriarty x reader #moriarty the patriot x reader #yuukoku no moriarty x reader #yuukoku no moriarty #william james moriarty x reader #yandere william james moriarty #yandere moriarty the patriot #yandere yuukoku no moriarty

103 notes · View notes

justinspoliticalcorner · 19 days ago

Text

Josh Marcus at The Independent:

The Trump administration is reportedly leaning on an Elon Musk-allied tech company to build wide-ranging data tools pooling government information on millions of Americans and immigrants alike. The campaign has raised alarms from critics that the company could be furthering Musk’s DOGE effort to vacuum up and potentially weaponize – or sell – mass amounts of sensitive personal data, particularly against vulnerable groups like immigrants and political dissidents. In March, the president signed an executive order dedicated to “stopping waste, fraud, and abuse by eliminating information silos,” a euphemism for pooling vast stores of data on Americans under the federal government.

To carry out the data effort, the administration has deepened the federal government’s longstanding partnership with Palantir, a tech firm specializing in building big data applications, which was co-founded by Silicon Valley investor, GOP donor, and JD Vance mentor Peter Thiel. Since Trump took office, the administration has reportedly spent more than $113 million with Palantir through new and existing contracts, while the company is slated to begin work on a new $795 million deal with the Defense Department. Palantir is reportedly working with the administration in the Pentagon, the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the Internal Revenue Service, according to The New York Times. Within these agencies, the firm is reportedly building tools to track the movement of migrants in real time and streamline all tax data. The company is also reportedly in talks about deploying its technology at the Social Security Administration and the Department of Education, both of which have been targets of DOGE, and which store sensitive information about Americans’ identities and finances. [...] The Trump administration has reportedly pursued a variety of efforts to use big data to support its priorities, including social media surveillance of immigrants to detect alleged pro-terror views, and American activists who disagree with Donald Trump’s views..

This is very disturbing: The Trump Regime is partnering up with Peter Thiel-founded Palantir to gather data on millions of Americans that could be used to target immigrants and dissidents of the 47 Regime.

See Also:

TNR: Trump Taps Palantir to Create Master Database on Every American

For Such A Time As This (Andra Watkins): Palantir, Project 2025, and State-Sanctioned Moral Values

#Privacy #Palantir #Donald Trump #Trump Administration #Surveillance #Database #Data #Data Privacy #Peter Thiel #DOGE #Elon Musk

23 notes · View notes

wordsandrobots · 4 months ago

Text

A couple of years ago, I attended a (virtual) conference where one of the main topics was the impact of so-called 'AI' tools on my particular industry. I work in scholarly publishing (on the publisher side -- I know, I know; for what it's worth, I am at least at a company that's actively trying to drive reform, is anti-impact factor, tries to reinforce the value of the work over the journal name, etc) and the application of 'generative AI' to facilitate plagiarism/fake papers is an obvious risk in this sector. Such software could easily be used to overwhelm the (meagre) defences journals have against such things, especially with the pressures placed on academics to get their work into 'high impact' publications above all else. The threat of 'paper-mills' (operations paid to seek publication by fraudulent means) ramping up via the use of ChatGP was clear and present amid those heady days of the initial hype-push.

What's stuck with me from that conference is a panel participant pointing out that 'AI' hasn't created any *new* problems; it's just accelerated existing ones. That is, fraud in science and science publishing has been an issue as long as scholarly publishing has existed as an industry. You don't need a fancy tool to generate you a fake paper. It helps, no doubt, but it's not a necessary step. And yes, it makes detection harder. But the actual solution here -- the way to put a stop to fake papers, dodgy authorship claims, and all the other variations on trying to beef up an academic's publication record for career gains -- doesn't lie in some technological arms-race between plagiarism-detection and paper-fabrication. We need to change the culture. We need to put a stop to the rewards for this kind of behaviour, by assessing academics by the actual value and quality of their research, without the proxy-step provided by place of publication.

(For the uninitiated, it is a huge problem in science that certain journals -- such as the big three of Nature, Cell and Science -- are seen as *the* place where groundbreaking research is published. Not only does this expose the English-language bias within global research, it creates the idea that to 'make it', you must publish somewhere like that, rather than just, you know, doing good solid work. Journals, big name or not, also have a history of selecting for headline-making research. So on the one hand, institutions are judging their employees' careers by their citations, not their work, and on the other, you absolutely cannot trust journals not to get dollar-signs in their eyes when someone comes along claiming that e.g. a certain vaccine actually causes an unrelated health condition. To pick a deliberate, very-specific example. On top of all this, peer review is *terrible* at catching faked results because it has to be approached in good-faith. Most of the time, fraud is only caught in hindsight, once the work has had time to circulate in the community, at which point wider damage has been done.)

Now, one of the reasons I haven't blogged much about so-called 'AI' is that my hatred for it is pre-rational. What I mean is, I hate 'generative AI' with the power of a thousand burning suns. I hate it on a conceptual level. The idea of feeding real people's work, their art, into a machine and have it churn out an approximation of that same work and art is abhorrent to me. I view it as a mockery of skills I have devoted my life to. If it could produce truly breathtaking imagery and crystal-sharp prose, I would still feel the same revulsion at the thought of removing intent from an act of communication, at the idea we should be content with bathetic mirrors in place of engaging with actual human beings and what they can do.

Separate from this, I believe there is good cause to be highly doubtful about the tools that have been pushed on the public over the last few years. I haven't used them myself (see above) but everything I've seen suggests they just aren't very good. It's painfully obvious how they can be/will be/are being used to devalue people's labour, thus strengthening corporations. There's the destruction of the information ecosystem that comes from integrating software intended to reproduce tone instead of facts into major search engines. There's the impact on the actual ecosystem of pouring resources and power into this technology. There's the simple detail that a lot of the people pushing this stuff are, frankly, just the worst.

However, I am extremely, painfully aware I am the wrong person to make rational arguments against these tools because what's actually driving my objection is disgust. I'm going to assume the worst about this particular kind of automation simply on the basis that I can't stand its existence.

There may be good, productive uses for this kind of technology! I can't tell you what they might be because I'm too busy looking for the bit where my worst opinions are validated. That's where I am on this. I actively have to guard my tongue around some of my colleagues, to keep from railing at how gullible I think they're being, buying into these things.

So yeah. Not a good place for making solid arguments. But that point from two years ago -- 'AI' is not creating any new problems.

I think it's easy to lose track of that. Consider the environmental impact. In order for you to read this, some server, somewhere, needs to be powered and cooled. The device you are reading this on is likely made from relatively rare materials that have a history of being source via destructive means (both to the environment and the people involved in the extraction process). I don't say that as a guilt-trip; I'm writing this via the same means. It's simply that the current landscape of our societies is dependent on things that comes at a cost to the planet and our fellow humans. That cost is made worse by rampant capitalism, but even under ideal conditions, mitigating it will require rethinking massive amounts of infrastructure.

This is not an excuse to make things worse. I want to be very clear about that. Nor am I claiming these issues are insoluble. It's simply a good example of 'AI' being an exaggerated case of an existing problem, namely how to balance the utility of modern communication technology against the extractive activity required to build it. As with many things, the glib answer is 'don't do capitalism' and, well, err, that kind of is the answer, reorientating away from the maximisation of profit above all else and from 'endless growth' doctrine. But crucially, that answer has nothing to do with 'AI'. If the hype-train collapsed tomorrow and everyone realised they've been buying snake-oil, and somehow the tech sector didn't collectively burn to the ground about it, we'd still have a problem to solve.

Because the problem isn't new.

That 'summarisation' tool Google or Adobe have swung on you, that shortens text with no regard for the actual information contained within what it's reducing is not some novel horror; it's just an acceleration of the same approach to design that sees 'engagement' as the primary driver, detached from what is actually materially happening to cause everyone to flock to a single place. MidJourney or what-have-you, allowing X or Y group to churn out endless cloying representations of their ideal reality, is just bad Photoshop composites with less effort required on the part of the person pushing the button. People will airbrush reality whether they have to do it with a prompt or an actual airbrush. We know this! Thomas Kinkade made a whole flipping career off it! It's the heart of mass-media advertising, to cheaply reproduce visions of simpler worlds for the sake of selling you something.

The truth is, grifters are going to grift, with whatever tools they have at their disposal. As long as there is a market for snake-oil, an incentive to cheat, a reason for people to be dissatisfied with their lot, there is going to be space for someone to sell an everything-app. A quick solution. An easy fix. We don't address that by playing whack-a-mole with every single dumb vapourware 'solution' that results; we address it by collapsing the space that permits those things to find their marks.

I think it is an objectively bad thing if paper-mills can work faster and easier and flood journal submissions with more junk than ever before. But it is also objectively bad for academia to be held hostage by a for-profit system that silos and constrains their work while being treated as the bar for judging how well they are doing their jobs. And the latter is the problem that actually *needs* to be solved, if we're going to have a hope of addressing the former.

Anyway, thank you for coming to this edition of 'Words sorts through his disgust to work out if there's a sensible position obscured beneath, for the sake of not being a raging arsehole to people who like shiny toys and haven't been in a love-hate relationship with their ability to draw for thirty years'.

#ai #generative ai #artificial stupidity #I do a fine impression of a Luddite some days #but then I actually know what the Luddites were protesting against so #hoorah for Captain Swing!

12 notes · View notes