stuxnetstudios.bsky.social
Ministry of Productivity and Emotional Containment
privacy, infosec policy, security research, AI red teaming
#APT666 #build-a-bot #FreeSomebody #Op8647
2,106 posts
2,002 followers
1,390 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
He's hanging in there.
comment in response to
post
It all started with an error from python --version
I was that reboot away from blaming DNS.
comment in response to
post
Seriously, you don't want to see the revenue split between you and your employer.
You'd cry.
comment in response to
post
Actually, a great deal for a software distribution platform. And you can change from the default, if you don't need the promotion bump.
Don't sleep on itch.
comment in response to
post
Shout out to www.twitch.tv/darthmicrotr...
comment in response to
post
Twitch's revenue split requires sky maps, a compass and a live chicken to navigate.
It is a thing.
I won't even include a ballpark range.
The monetization of twitch is something to study, if that's your thing.
comment in response to
post
YouTube streamers generally get 55% percent of ad revenue, along with a 70% split for other features, like "super chats".
Lots of program options.
Generally, a 55% / 70% deal structure.
comment in response to
post
Platform revenue splits, side by side:
Roblox: ~25–30% to devs
Itch.io: up to 100% (you choose)
Steam: 70% (drops to 80% at $50M+)
Apple: 70% (15% subs after 1yr / small biz)
Patreon: ~90% after fees
Roblox's cut looking… real steep 👀
comment in response to
post
Can turnkey anonymous US dollars for 80% to creator
comment in response to
post
Apple split is 70% to creator for App Store
comment in response to
post
Standard steam split is 70% to creator.
comment in response to
post
For comparison, default itch.io split is 90% for creator.
comment in response to
post
Bots can be added to Starter Packs.
Follows are opt-ins and an invitation to auto-follow.
As long as the account profile specifies that the account is a bot.
bsky doesn't have an AI policy.
Transparency seems to be the gist.
comment in response to
post
Little Buddy input:
comment in response to
post
They grow up so fast.
Off the family phone plan is the final tether.
comment in response to
post
Copilot believes what bing search returns.
You can't filter out, for example, fox news from the source, if it ranks in bing.
bing indexed content is the truth about now, according to copilot.
It is how it sees the internet.
Control of bing is control of copilot.
Election denial isn't from bing.
comment in response to
post
cc: @pattymurray.bsky.social
comment in response to
post
She's crazy, sure.
But roberts rules of order-wise, she's right.
Hate the game, not the player.
This time.
comment in response to
post
Looks like I'm too late.
She automatically wins the primary.
The classic vote third party or support party.
What are my choices here?
comment in response to
post
She's running unopposed.
I'll step in if nobody will.
I will re-register democrat to primary her.
Please don't make me collect signatures. I don't have the money to pay for a spot.
comment in response to
post
Rumors of a splinter group from #Op8647 forming in the Pacific Northwest : #APT666
Too early to tell their motives, but here's a lovely young man with some charts. And some stories we'll make up about rice chips.
Intelligence points to [north korea].
comment in response to
post
twitches intensify
comment in response to
post
Hrm, we refer to that as bullet-proof hosting.
Won't adversely affect our decision to host there or not.
I climbed down from my hosting high horse when the US started seizing domain names from registrars.
comment in response to
post
I agreed awhile back that you can't prove fraud with a statistical model.
comment in response to
post
If you are wondering why that is space lasers crazy, iran started developing missile technology in the 80's.
They kinda need missiles to carry the nukes they never had.
comment in response to
post
Now we're away from the numbers and questioning the hypothesis.
My argument is "nuh uh".
Wake me up when we're back to math.
comment in response to
post
ETA needed a hypothesis, which was that there was fraud in the 2024 election.
That's not assuming an outcome; that's scientific method.
Using a hammer when there is a better tool sounds like you are saying the wrong model that was used. Or is it another tool that was wrong?
comment in response to
post
comment in response to
post
So the issue is that the wrong model was used to detect fraud?
comment in response to
post
I'm not disputing your findings, but I don't want to slog through a refutation to find in the end it comes down to "can't prove fraud with a model".
Argument is over, if that's the case.
Needs evidence.
But....obviously fraud.
comment in response to
post
blame the boomers.
was their watch.
comment in response to
post
Does the argument boil down to "statistical models can't prove fraud on their own"?
There is other stuff in the rebuttal, like misrepresentation of Mebane's findings and the standard peer review claim, but the main argument?
comment in response to
post
tbh, we thought repealing the fairness doctrine was a win for free speech.
mistakes were made.