I am not knowledgeable about nuclear energy, however, I would not be surprised if this reversing could have to do with having a nuclear pipeline - or at least a nuclear knowledge - already available in the country, in case things go south and there's need to develop own nukes
> Reading comprehension is shocking, not just in you but most people here. The post just said "can cause a grant to be pulled". That's entirely consistent with this list being a screening filter and somebody will look at what the grant/application is actually for.
Both the post and the comment you are replying to used the term "flagged". Best I can tell, they aren't claiming what you seem to think they are claiming.
That's true. I was really generally replying to other comments but put it on this one because it was quite specific. You're quite right, an internal flag isn't a ban.
> we expect, with Popper, that all our best theories of fundamental physics are going to be superseded eventually
This inductive case against scientific knowledge should only serve to decrease our second-order credence in the proposition that we have assigned the highest credence to the scientific hypotheses that most closely correspond with reality. It does nothing to change the fact that, conditional on evidence we currently have, we may very well have correctly proportioned credence.
Depends where the check is... most likely outside of the app itself. A regular phone with google play services already has a "backdoor" of sorts where google can push any code they want to you... which they have already used for dubious purposes like forcefully uninstalling certain apps from devices under the guise of security.
Revanced gives the app a new app ID (app.revanced.android.youtube) and resigns it, so Google cannot for example just check that apps using the youtube app id have a valid MD5.
They could check for Revanced and friends too though, probably even dual-purpose that to disallow installing it entirely since it wouldn't be allowed on the play store in the first place.
>They could check for Revanced and friends too though
Not really, at least not at the app ID level, because revanced can change app ids indefinitely. Google generally only solves a problem when it can be automated, and manually adding revanced app ids to a blacklist cannot easily be automated. In fact, since revanced is patched on device, they could assign each user a unique app id which would make using app ids as a solution unworkable for Google.
Like I just said, you do not download a revanced youtube apk. You download a revanced patcher that patches the APK on your device. Right now, the patcher gives each app the same id, but theoretically it could give a random string as the app id that is generated by the user at runtime while patching, so that would not work. Even if that were not the case, Google would not set up a script to download latest revanced to check the id. It's only a few steps away from being manual because it would not work for other projects or even for revanced itself if they changed the website's code or domain name. What I mean by solving a problem with automation is like how Google detects copyrighted music in youtube videos and sends the ad revenue to the copyright owners.[0] Having someone constantly fix a script that "automates" finding app ids does not meet that bar.
The Play Store functions as a type of backdoor which allows them to run any code on your device that they want, which includes scanning for Revanced (regardless of the actual app ID, they could just look for the NAME of the app for example) and removing it.
Why couldn't revanced generate a random app name? Also, I am not arguing that Google cannot find some way to block revanced specifically. I am arguing that they will not do so based on the way they generally handle these issues. If they really wanted to block revanced, the easiest way would be to validate that the user is signed in and that the connected account has a subscription to youtube premium. I have no idea why they don't do that already. In any case they definitely would not starting checking the app's "android:label" value against a list of disallowed app names.
I think they probably could but I am unsure of the implementation details.
Patching out the check might work for now, since they will be supporting older versions of the app for a while.
If they eventually decide that the server needs to verify the check, it might need to be spoofed rather than removed which can be more difficult (again, depending on implementation details).
It gives YouTube the justification to remove videos that may not be technically rule-breaking otherwise. Though, I do imagine proving that a video is AI generated will quickly become functionally impossible.
reply