They probably have a machine that trawls the internet for mentions of itself, then extracts the IP of whoever posted them, builds a profile on their entire web activity, links it to all the personally identifiable information that can be found on them online, then hacks into their devices and starts recording them through their own camera, mic, wifi, etc., and possibly mails them a brand new pager with custom modifications.
So yeah, can’t really blame the OOP for censoring the acronym…
They probably have a machine that trawls the internet for mentions of itself, then extracts the IP of whoever posted them, builds a profile on their entire web activity, links it to all the personally identifiable information that can be found on them online, then hacks into their devices and starts recording them through their own camera, mic, wifi, etc., and possibly mails them a brand new pager with custom modifications.
So yeah, can’t really blame the OOP for censoring the acronym…
I doubt censoring stops it, though.
My same response to the other comments applies here too:
Yeah but even google lens can understand what’s written, imagine if their tech couldn’t lmao
Scanning every jpeg on the internet with OCR would require far more compute than simply doing a regex for plaintext.
Also that white line can really fuck with most lightweight OCRs
Yeah, it just ‘extracts’ the IP from the username.