Division of labour is a good thing. It's why we are rich today.

Local stores bullshit too, I was at a well known American ‘sporting goods’ store and got an exercise ball of 75cm size (it states on box), it is fully pumped and smaller than a 55cm ball that I have. When purchasing online I’ve had better luck

Caveat emptor

I want you to be right, but that requires quite a lot of hope.

What positive effects?

More suburban strip malls, more fluorescent lighting, more people working mindless do nothing retail jobs for minimum wage, higher prices due to zero economies of scale, inefficiency from every local store reinventing the wheel of staffing/recruiting/scheduling/warehouseing/anti-theft/POS/advertising/etc.

If online shops have to raise prices to combat fraud it doesn’t suddenly turn springfield Ohio into the Zurich city center.

All we know is that we have no idea what the consequences are going to be after this plays out.

>An easy solution - open the package when the delivery person comes

That would massively slow down delivery times, especially if the packaging is non-trivial to open/inspect. Not to mention that not everyone works a comfy remote job where they're at the door the entire day.

The honor system is a remnant of a high-trust society. Living in a place where you can generally trust your neighbors is neat.

Good idea. It’s a type of image that doesn't need to be modified, so an encoding verification scheme would work.

C2PA only holds up until someone can extract the key material from any cheap-ass sensor.

> rendering homework ineffective

Homework isn't any more ineffective imo. The way we educate and grade is.

Imagine if people went to school to learn something rather than to "level up". And you earned a job based on what you know, or what you can do, rather than what degree you banked.

Then maybe you would want to do the homework.

If gen AI helps us flip the current system on it's head that would be a good thing.

We absolutely also need full and complete peace on earth and no more wars, but what we need isn't always what is feasible to get in real life. "No-AI proofs" falls into that bucket of "Would be nice to have, but very infeasible to actually create".

This seems like such a tricky problem. There was a no-ai camera posted here recently which verified the photos were genuinely taken on the device. It was pointed out someone could photograph an ai image via the camera to produce a verified image.

Maybe it needs to be similar to SSL certificates where trusted authorities can verify and revoke verification for digital assets.

Wouldn’t it end up being some form of nuisance proof? Introducing friction to create verification check points or examine and establish the chain of evidence?

But that will only matter for highly legal things or important things. Everything else will be too much of a bother to follow information hygiene.

It’s like we’ve introduced an information weed, whose only goal is to create content that matches our dopamine receptors. Maybe our instincts will shift to assuming any shiny or eye catching content is fruit of the weed? Designed to attract us?

back to the blockchain!

Of course. I already imagine an end-to-end hardware DRM pipeline where images can only be modified with the software made by "trusted" certified parties. Mandated by law and tied to your real ID, of course. Analog loophole can be dealt with later, first things first. /s

I’ve heard that this was happening with food apps in India. I am waiting for when people realize how to fake prescriptions.

scamming to get refunds has always been a thing.

well, now that it hit the news it will happen more often!

There is always a Fix to a problem. Fixes for fraud will always impact the majority who don’t use fraudulent techniques.

The cost of the Fix is the issue.

That’s resources that need to be spent to combat a type of fraud that was impossible at scale 4 years ago.

I've been rotating a few amazon accounts for a decade to be in almost continuous free prime, they don't give a shit yet

This is a somewhat useful filter for actual consumers but here we are also looking at large scale fraud. The article mentions opponents using rotating IP addresses and high volumes of refund requests to try to overwhelm counter-fraud measures.

> If you travel and go to some random beach town and buy random item from random street merchant, they won’t give you a refund. Main issue to bridge is ensuring the item is expected as you can’t physically inspect prior to purchase.

Depends on how large the beach town is, and what country. Whenever I've needed to return/change things in those type of places (in South America, South Europe and around East Asia), it's never been a problem even if I don't have a receipt, as usually the vendor recognize you, or the person who sold it to you is around somewhere.

I can remember one clear time (probably out of 10s) where someone refused to take back an item that clearly didn't work the way it was sold to us.

> Eventually the concept of refunds will become very rare

Except where enshrined by law, eg in the EU

> Eventually the concept of refunds will become very rare.

I don’t think so—it makes the risk of purchase too high, and people will buy less. Which is not what the sellers want.

> it, along with free shipping were pretty rare before Amazon and Walmart.

Refunds were not rare before Walmart and Amazon.