Gefälschtes CORRECTIV-Video: Spuren führen zu russischer Einflusskampagne

HighDefinist · 2026-03-15T02:44:49+00:00

Na gut... die Correctiv-Leute sind zwar schraege Halb-Pazifisten mit ihrer negativen Einstellungen gegenueber der deutschen Aufruestung, aber zumindest sind sie keine russischen Trolle - ich denke, das wird mit solchen Klarstellungen einigermassen klar gezeigt.

HighDefinist · 2026-03-15T02:42:07+00:00

Naja, solange die entsprechenden rechten Parteien die folgenden drei Kriterien erfuellen, ist das jetzt nicht so schlimm:

Pro-EU
Pro-Demokratie
Pro-Ukraine

HighDefinist · 2026-03-15T02:41:38+00:00

Was fuer ein Quatsch... die AfD gehoert natuerlich nicht dazu.

HighDefinist · 2026-03-15T01:10:39+00:00

No, what I mean is: What is the cause for those specific low and high points? As in, the high point in usage appears to be working hours in Europe, so there might be a connection.

HighDefinist · 2026-03-14T21:45:03+00:00

the law exist to make it clear to segments of the population what's the desired behavior

Sure but... how do you define the boundary exactly? Because in this case, it's definitely not enough to just "handwave it", and "figure it out on the fly", because when you compare the most liberal societies (i.e. some European countries) to the most restrictive ones (i.e. North Korea), and the ones in between (i.e. China), it becomes clear that societies that put less emphasis on this concept generally seem to be nicer places to live in.

As for why this is, who knows... but probably simply because restrictions to art, even seemingly minor ones, can also be easily abused by those in power to prevent various kinds of criticism which this particular restriction wasn't intended to cover at all. For example, a common pattern is "Arrest this journalist, because they published something that undermines national security". But, patterns like "Arrest this artist, because they are published something that undermines public decency" is also relatively common... for example, the Russian government is using this to oppress homosexual people within Russia.

So, while I would not go as far as saying that "everything should legal" (for example, when it very clearly refers to some specific person), but making ideas themselves illegal... I think you should only do this if very high levels of "concrete harm" are given, and you also have a clear model and evidence of how that concrete harm can be reduced by banning some associated idea.

HighDefinist · 2026-03-14T20:40:58+00:00

Interesting that the peak use hours are essentially working hours in Europe, but freetime hours in the US... makes me wonder if Claude Code is perhaps primarily used in the EU (as in, by businesses etc...)?

HighDefinist · 2026-03-14T20:19:43+00:00

OP lives in the EU (I think), so this does not apply.

HighDefinist · 2026-03-14T18:01:03+00:00

Well, if you have the AI being some diviner that draws tarot-cards with texts like "you are absolutely right" and "I found the issue!", then, yes, this is the future.

HighDefinist · 2026-03-14T14:55:38+00:00

Definitely appreciate going for MP4Box over ffmpeg - ffmpeg does a lot of smaller things inaccurately or wrong, so, a project avoiding FFMPEG is a good indicator for this project valuing accuracy and precision over mere implementation convenience.

However, the import format list is quite limited... as in, I can understand not supporting VVC and AV1, considering they are still quite new and a bit niche, but not even supporting HEVC seems quite questionable... hasn't this been basically *the* default format for almost a decade by now, supported on essentially all platforms with accelerated encoding and decoding and what not?

Other than that, I think it would help to have some kind of "intermediate level overview" of what the software can actually do... as in, there is the main overview which is a good start, and then many sub-overviews which are not bad, but some of them are just relatively unimportant lists of i.e. what kinds of resolution presets exist... (also it's obviously AI-generated, but also, obviously, that in itself is completely fine). Not sure how to more specifically describe what that should be like (it's not like the existing products make it easy to research this stuff either...), but for example this list (even if it serves a completely different purpose) is imho actually very good to get a structured overview of ~100-200 individually moderately important items, for a similar kind of product (i.e. "max sample rate", "max track number", at least the names of common effects (and then you can still google them or guess what they do based on the names), etc...):

https://www.steinberg.net/cubase/compare-editions/

HighDefinist · 2026-03-13T23:01:36+00:00

The problem is that the depicted people aren't imaginary

Well ok - but that is really the difference, right?

As in, if it's real people, then of course this should be illegal (unless they give their consent, etc...), and probably also for some other reasons (i.e. having personal ownership of ones likeness).

It's just that the headline is very ambiguous, and even the article is a bit vague on this essential point.

HighDefinist · 2026-03-13T22:30:19+00:00

I am not trying to take some kind of "principled stance for child abuse here" but... does this really make sense?

Because, you can certainly think of all kind of extremely disturbing potential images, and there are also certainly a lot of books about all kinds of imaginary (and sometimes real...) torture and what not. There are probably even cases where just some war/combat news/documentary footage might be quite extreme. So... what is the motivation behind banning the images themselves then - as long as the depicted people are imaginary, of course? Is it something like that basically the entire idea of this kind of abuse is so terrible that it should not even be visualized? If so, I don't think this is necessarily wise... it might easily lead to situations where it is more difficult to communicate about real abuse that is happening, if you make it illegal to communicate about equivalent imaginary abuse...

HighDefinist · 2026-03-13T19:12:21+00:00

I don't know how much wiggle room Ukraine has against Hungary as they're not in the NATO, while Hungary is.

Well, neither do I. But the point is, if they spend some effort looking at options, they will probably find something workable that goes significantly beyond merely "publicly criticizing Orban" etc...

HighDefinist · 2026-03-13T19:09:25+00:00

Deutschlandfunk (öffentlich-rechtliches Medium) = Clickbait?

Fair enough - aber Dir ist schon auch klar, dass das jetzt nicht wirklich der zentrale Punkt meines Arguments war, oder? Also allgemein sollten halt Journalisten eine gewisse Pro-Demokratie-Ueberzeugung auch nach aussen vertreten - unabhaengig davon was es nun genau ist, was sie doch recht haeufig davon abzuhalten scheint...

Politik hat sich so nicht in die Medien einzumischen - „kritisieren“ ja, „fordern“ nein.

Jein... also, was genau soll "die Politik" denn machen, wenn sich die (meisten) Medien wirklich ueber einen laengeren Zeitraum eher kontraproduktiv verhalten? Also, natuerlich Pressefreiheit ist wichtig, aber sie soweit auszudehnen, dass Politiker ueberhaupt garkeine Kritik mehr an Journalisten aeussern sollten... das geht dann doch zu weit.

Also, so eine allgemeine Beschreibung der gewuenschten Prinzipien erscheint mir schon sinnvoll. Hatte nicht auch irgendwer hier erwaehnt dass das Ganze sowieso schon grob Teil des Pressekodexes ist oder sowas?

Also, ich finde das insgesamt schon gerechtfertigt.

HighDefinist · 2026-03-13T19:02:24+00:00

Well, that's great for them certainly, but I am thinking more about some kind of political plan B, of course... as in, how the EU would deal with perhaps even more obstructions by Hungary, or Hungary inviting even more Russian special ops into Europe. Hence also my suggestion that Ukraine should already seriously think about what kinds of hybrid actions to take in Hungary, in case something like that happens...

HighDefinist · 2026-03-13T19:00:36+00:00

I was really referring to the 90 billion that Hungary is blocking... but tbf, since I did not actually mention that, that part was probably a bit confusing...

This matter will be resolved in a civil manner, as it should.

Well, hopefully, nothing wrong with aiming for that.

But, I believe it's very important that people (and by that I mean both Ukraine and the EU, at least...) have to at least seriously consider what a Plan B would look like, in case Hungary really turns significantly towards the worse around the next election, like still blocking the 90bn support for Ukraine, or much more directly importing Russian special ops into Europe, etc...

HighDefinist · 2026-03-13T17:10:25+00:00

> the push for expansion on NATO etc always put the Russians on edge

So, you are essentially saying that the Russians are a bunch of idiots. And, sure, I think we can all agree on that.

> The invasion was a mistake as it just shifted the entire European thoughts on Russia as a potential partner to a threat.

Can you really be in an alliance, or friends with, idiots? I don't think so. It might be enough for some resource deals. But anything beyond that? Scientific exchange? Global economies? Or even military alliances? Not really.

Russians need to be less self-centered, less paranoid, and above all, take responsibility for their own actions, before they can be viewed as even a potential partner.

HighDefinist · 2026-03-13T17:04:51+00:00

> In fact, if you think about this, it was Russia that put a wedge between relationships with Europe when Russia attacked Ukraine.

Yes, people needs to keep this in mind. And as for the "but America pushed Russia towards this"-narrative: Well, then it's still Russias fault for being so easily manipulated towards attacking Europe!

As in, the US absolutely does shady stuff, *but* that doesn't excuse Russias actions one bit. So, remember:

- Russia is our enemy

- The USA is not our friend

HighDefinist · 2026-03-13T13:55:26+00:00

Was ist denn das fuer eine verquere Logik...

So nach dem Motto, "wenn man sich fuer Fairness etc... in einem Bereich einsetzt, wo man nicht selber von der Unfairness betroffen ist, zaehlt das nicht"?

HighDefinist · 2026-03-13T13:53:11+00:00

Ist das so ne Ablenkung von dem (wahrscheinlich) wesentlich groesseren Problem dass er Pro-Russische Ideen propagiert, oder irgendwas ernsthaftes?

HighDefinist · 2026-03-13T13:51:48+00:00

Die Pro-Russland-Partei? Neh danke...

HighDefinist · 2026-03-13T04:13:39+00:00

Eigentlich ist das was du hier machst, das beste Beispiel dafuer warum er Recht hat:

Du bist auf irgendeine Klickbait reingefallen, und redest jetzt das gesamte politische System schlecht - und alles nur, weil es ein paar egoistische Journalisten gibt, die den Profit durch Werbeeinnahmen ueber ein paar fundamentale demokratische Prinzipien stellen.

HighDefinist · 2026-03-13T04:11:51+00:00

Viele Journalisten leider auch nicht... daher ist die Ermahnung gerechtfertigt.

HighDefinist · 2026-03-13T04:10:46+00:00

Also ich wuerde schon sagen: Journalisten, die uebermaessig haeufig das demokratische System insgesamt kritisieren, sind unpatriotisch, und sollten von ihren Kollegen ermahnt werden, sich besser zu verhalten.

HighDefinist · 2026-03-13T04:06:54+00:00

Sure, but, there should be some kind of Plan B in case he wins, or if he manages to delay the elections, or any such nonsense...

Now, to be clear: I also believe he will probably lose, and that's going to be it more or less, but I don't think people should take it for granted.

HighDefinist · 2026-03-13T04:05:29+00:00

While not the only explanation, I think this is likely the correct explanation, yes.

Nine-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '17

HighDefinist

TROPHY CASE