IDK Rick, seems like hype-driven something that will either cease to exist or leak all your data in like a half a year. At this point I’d better self-host.

It doesn’t really matter in the context of this particular topic. They’ve highlighted the problem and I think in here we should abstract from their personality and their conflicts with Murena & Co., and focus on the problem itself.

And the problem is that, regardless of who’s implementing the attestation technology and regardless of who is critizing it, the very concept of device attestation based on OEM/Google/Apple/Murena/GrapheneOS/whoever approval is harmful and anti-consumer at its core.

No matter who owns the authority to decide which devices are deemed “good” and which are deemed “bad”, this authority shouldn’t exist at all. Only the user should be in charge of the decision of which os to use — be it Google’s Android, GrapheneOS, MIUI, eOS, PostmarketOS or MS-DOS — OEMs/Google/Murena/etc should have no say in it.

https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/116200110686604617

It’s literally the same crap, just “under the new management”.

From the article it seems that it’s not even stylometry, but profile features extraction from the large amount of text. So, for example, if I have my full true profile somewhere where I never mention something like BDSM but in another place I have a blog specifically about BDSM but intentionally (and let’s assume efficiently) omit or change every single detail about myself there, then, in theory, this particular technique should fail.

But yes, nothing prevents people from using LLMs in the same way for stylometry (and I’m 101% sure that those who are interested in that are already doing so). And yes, local “rewriter” LLM would help to some extent, but I think there has been another research somewhere that LLM-produced text allows to, if not completely recover the original prompt, then at least kind of fingerprint it, so… I wouldn’t fully trust that method either :)