Bitcoin does not protect privacy, that was a claim when it was new, but has been thoroughly debunked. Bitcoins are as traceable as any other digital payment.
Using it illegally is reserved for people or nations that are out of reach of the law.

🤣🤣🤣
👍

Exactly. But the independence from government control was a HUGE selling point originally.
But it only works if you are legally immune from consequences. Like for instance Russia and North Korea.
And guess who has been using bitcoin to circumvent sanctions? 😋

Except if you are a country like Russia or North Korea.

At least nothing of any real value was lost. Bitcoins are not really better than NFT, and those are worthless today. It’s just that bitcoin can be used for illegal activities, otherwise they have no use, but that’s apparently enough for some people to still believe they are worth something.

Bribe is my guess, but I think Trump may die before it happens.

In general yes, but not when it’s really good news about how awful they are doing, that gives us the opportunity for a bit of schadenfreude.

👍

Is that a fact or just a suspicion? Because I don’t see you providing any sources for that.
Don’t get me wrong I suspect so myself, but I wouldn’t make such a claim without backing it up.

Of course China would never dream of doing such a thing, it’s as obvious as USA would never dream of it either. It’s not like either side have organisations specifically for such purposes.
Pfft The crazy imagination of some journalists?
/S

Normally it would, but In accordance with the content of the article, the “portrait” is a semaphore.

Don’t blame me, blame the researchers that thought it was a good idea to use this stupid wording for what is really profiling.

I would argue that if you’re being pedantic about the language being used, then why are you implying anyone asked an AI to make a portrait of anyone?

I didn’t I just used the semantics of the article and headline. Obviously it’s not a literal “portrait” you’d have to be pretty stupid to read it like that.

Did you even read the article?

The AI memory then uses this to build a detailed profile of the user, a mechanism researchers in a study published earlier this year call “the algorithmic self-portrait.”

Well technically it’s not even a portrait, it’s what is commonly known as a profile, which is also clearly stated first. And it’s definitely not a “self” profile either.
It’s very Stupid language to use by the researchers.

Asking an AI to make a portrait is not a self portrait.

Microsoft must have truly been shitting it. 38 whole people trying out other software

That’s not the point, the problem for Microsoft is that when people begin to realize we don’t need Microsoft products because open source solutions work, it will spread like fire.

The attempt was however half assed, and Microsoft never really needed to worry.

Says Microsoft propaganda site.

I bet he literally believes himself to be some sort of tech genius.

I do not get the skepticism? I 100% trust Zuckerberg that this will be about as profitable as the metaverse. 🤣 🤡 💸

So you are saying there’s a chance?

Slippery slope - straw man argument, nothing in the post you respond to says that.