Wake up, Neo

That’s the one that’s really easy to hack, isn’t it? Now what?

… for faceswapping? O.o

I’d rather not create something like this

Here’s the wikipedia definition

Plagiarism is the representation of another person’s language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions as one’s own original work.

So, I’m afraid that my definition is closer to consensus than yours.

If word gets out that you used a ghostwriter, you’re gonna get in trouble for plagiarism. That’s the thing they’ll accuse you of.

While consent is a part of why plagiarism is shitty, it’s not what makes something plagiarism. You can check it the other way around: if I’m legitimately quoting someone, do I need explicit consent, or is it implied (if it’s published work)?

About the BSD stuff: yeah, it might not be illegal and consential, but both of these things aren’t necessary for plagiarism.

What are you talking about? I’ve given you several examples of plagiarism outside of a legal concept, which means that there are non-legalistic definitions.

Here’s another one: copying someone’s homework is plagiarism. It’s not illegal, though.

I’d argue that most acts of plagiarism are actually legal, but can result in getting your title revoked. That’s not because of an IP law violation, since you don’t have ownership of an argument in an academic text.

Letting a ghostwriter write an academic paper is plagiarism, too, btw. How would that make sense in an IP law context, if the ghost writer not obtaining the IP is the whole point?

I think your legalistic view of the world is quite limiting.

It’s not illegal to rephrase what someone wrote in a book and pass it off as your own work. You can’t “own” a cultural analysis. It’s still plagiarism.

I never made a MS account, so I no longer own Minecraft since they stopped accepting Mojang accounts.

My sibling in christ: you never owned Minecraft, then.

If you’re only interested in singleplayer or can convince your friends to move: There’s a free, open source alternative called Luanti.

There’s more than a legal definition of plagiarism.

Plagiarism is when you sell the work of others as your own without attribution. There are bucketloads of examples of legal plagiarism.

I’m pretty sure that everything H. Bomberguy discussed in his plagiarism video was legal, for example.

Ok, then call it “plagiarising”.

That channel kinda seems like part of the anti “woke” bandwagon outrage tourist.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_cheese_model

Sorry, homie. I’m not gonna keep arguing with you if you obviously can’t argue without moving the goal posts, if your life depends on it.

My point still stands: Encrypting metadata can be sensible/necessary for your threat model and does not count as security through obscurity. You have failed to explain how it would be and then started to attack me, personally.

Have fun misrepresenting this comment as well, bye.

Firstly, if the police confiscate your PC, they already know (and have proven to a judge) that you conduct illegal activity and likely already have enough to convict you of a crime. lol

Not if it’s for securing evidence. That is only collected before the verdict/conviction. Otherwise, there wouldn’t be any need for a trial.

Also, your metadata can put others in jeopardy. If you’re busted for being an antifascist activist, who the police deems a “terrorist” and you’re also member of another activist group which up to then wasn’t in the sights of law enforcement, then you’re putting that other activist group’s members in danger.

Secondly, you can have an account at a private torrent tracker […]

That wasn’t my argument, though. You can criticise the circumstances that started my example premise, but the point still stands: having metadata that’s clearly visible can be dangerous, because it can give an attacker more information on you (depending on your threat model).

These are exceptionally poor arguments.

You’ve actually only attacked my examples, not my argument. My original point still stands: The type of accounts you have can be something you legitimately want/need to encrypt. Not only the credentials.

Because if the data is secure, it makes no difference if a bad actor knows you have an account with a service or not

Bullshit. It’s not about the obvious services, but rather the ones that give more info about my profile.

If the police confiscates my PC because of e.g. piracy, they could nail me down if they also knew that I had an account at a darkweb marketplace, or that I am a member of an organization that’s deemed to be “terrorist”.

The only way to hide that info with pass is to give it a cryptic name which make it less obvious, what the account is actually for. That is both inconvenient and I would argue: also quite security of obscurity.

This is an example of security through obscurity.

It is not. Security through obscurity relies on having a visible secret hidden somewhere where “no one would think to check”. That’s different than encrypting the whole meta-structure of your digital life.

That’s a non-sequitur.

How is encrypting the metadata, as well as the data security through obscurity? O.o

OP is talking about hhe meta-structure being visible.

If my filesystem gets compromised (stolen, confiscated, etc.) and I use pass, the infiltrators will know that I have a password that I labeled “slrpnk.net”. They won’t have access to the password itself, but they’ll be able to determine all the services I have accounts at.

RA3 brought us Soviet Russian Tim Curry. Nothing has to be redeemed, fight me.

Say whuuut? 👀

I only read it somewhere since I only played the game on PC way back.

Supposedly, the PS2 version suffers from slowdown/FPS dips.