![](https://programming.dev/pictrs/image/9da76c57-e62c-4118-b288-4b11bb14bff3.png)
![](https://programming.dev/pictrs/image/8140dda6-9512-4297-ac17-d303638c90a6.png)
It’s Base62 actually, misremembered that. It’s to avoid some special characters iirc. And no, performance is fine.
We’re using this: https://github.com/TheArchitectDev/Architect.Identities
It’s Base62 actually, misremembered that. It’s to avoid some special characters iirc. And no, performance is fine.
We’re using this: https://github.com/TheArchitectDev/Architect.Identities
https://github.com/TheArchitectDev/Architect.Identities
Here’s the package one of our former developers created. It has some advantages and some drawbacks, but overall it’s been quite a treat to work with!
At the company I work at we use UUIDv7 but base63 encoded I believe. This gives you fairly short ids (16 chars iirc, it includes lowercase letters) that are also sortable.
This was in the national news like a week ago in the Nerherlands. I remember coming across an article about it.
Aaand here’s your misunderstanding.
All messages detected by whatever algorithm/AI the provider implemented are sent to the authorities. The proposal specifically says that even if there is some doubt, the messages should be sent. Family photo or CSAM? Send it. Is it a raunchy text to a partner or might one of them be underage? Not 100% sure? Send it. The proposal is very explicit in this.
Providers are additionally required to review a subset of the messages sent over, for tweaking w.r.t. false positives. They do not do a manual review as an additional check before the messages are sent to the authorities.
If I send a letter to someone, the law forbids anyone from opening the letter if they’re not the intended recipient. E2E encryption ensures the same for digital communication. It’s why I know that Zuckerberg can’t read my messages, and neither can the people from Signal (metadata analysis is a different thing of course). But with this chat control proposal, suddenly they, as well as the authorities, would be able to read a part of the messages. This is why it’s an unacceptable breach of privacy.
Thankfully this nonsensical proposal didn’t get a majority.
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=COM:2022:209:FIN
Here’s the text. There are no limits on which messages should be scanned anywhere in this text. Even worse: to address false positives, point 28 specifies that each provider should have human oversight to check if what the system finds is indeed CSAM/grooming. So it’s not only the authorities reading your messages, but Meta/Google/etc… as well.
You might be referring to when the EU can issue a detection order. This is not what is meant with the continued scanning of messages, which providers are always required to do, as outlined by the text. So either you are confused, or you’re a liar.
Cite directly from the text where it imposes limits on the automated scanning of messages. I’ll wait.
The point is is that it should never, under no circumstances monitor and eavesdrop private chats. It’s an unacceptable breach of privacy.
Also, please explain what “specific circumstances” you are referring to. The current proposal doesn’t limit the scanning of messages in any way whatsoever.
It does require invasive oversight. If I send a picture of my kid to my wife, I don’t want some AI algorithm to have a brainfart and instead upload the picture to Europol for strangers to see and to put me on some list I don’t belong.
People sharing CSAM are unlikely to use apps that force these scans anyway.
Clearly says Walt Gisnep.
The financial sector offers a magnitude more services than just “transactions”. It’s a stupid comparison.
It could perhaps turns a fan due to the air current it generates by spinning?
The 24h cycle with subdivisions in 60 is easy for dividing them up though. 60 divides by 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, 15, 20 and 30.
That’s likely due to the Switch throttling itself a fair bit in handheld mode, to avoid overheating and spending too much battery power.
Running an emulator on Linux likely uncaps the performance.
I tried this but can’t reproduce your results. AdGuard doesn’t seem to be sending any weird DNS or tracking requests on my phone.
I’m fairly certain you’re seeing some kind of false positive, but I don’t quite know what’s going on exactly.
As if Google doesn’t already know.
Strange, it’s the exact opposite for me. Moon in dark mode, sun in light mode.
Aren’t religion checks more about straight facts about various religions?
Chromecast support is on hold because F-droid doesn’t allow gms proprietary libraries: https://github.com/jarnedemeulemeester/findroid/pull/139
The creator deems theme music to be “annoying” so they won’t add it: https://github.com/jarnedemeulemeester/findroid/issues/105
So no dice, it seems.
Findroid does lack Chromecast support and theme music in the library it seems. Other than that it does look good!
The PR had some issues regarding files that were pushed that shouldn’t have been, adding refactors that should have been in separate PRs, etc…
Though the main reason is that Signal doesn’t consider this issue a part of their threat model.