April 2020 donation progress: $0.00/$250 (0%). Click to learn more...
close
Hello! Thank you for using yiff.party!

We hope you enjoy using it. yiff.party operates on a non-profit basis, and as such, all the server expenses are paid by our users. We don't want to run ads or infect you with crypto miners. We depend on users like you to keep the site running, and to preserve years and terabytes of amazing content—some of which is no longer available from its original creators!

Because of the nature of the site, many users are reluctant to donate. That's OK! yiff.party was created so everyone can enjoy the content we host without any restrictions or paywalls. But if you value the service we provide, and are able to, we—and our users—would be tremendously grateful if you considered making a donation.

Donation progress for April 2020

So far, approximately $0.00 has been raised out of our target of $250.00. We're about 0% of the way there! Please note: this tracker is updated manually—don't worry if your donation doesn't show up immediately!

yiff.party's server costs are due on the last day of each month. So, we need to meet this goal before 30 April!

How to donate?

At this time, yiff.party can only accept donations in numerous cryptocurrencies. Please select a currency below to display the relevant donation address.

Bitcoin (BTC)
Bitcoin Cash (BCH)
Ethereum (ETH)
Ethereum Classic (ETC)
Litecoin (LTC)
Why can't I donate through other means (eg. PayPal)?

Due to the nature of sites like yiff.party, it is very difficult to find payment processors who will accept clients like us. If we were to accept donations via PayPal, it wouldn't take more than a day for someone to submit an abuse report and get our account frozen. Until a viable way of accepting monetary donations becomes available, cryptocurrency will remain the only option.

There are many resources available on how to purchase crypto. For Bitcoin, check out bitcoin.org's page on buying Bitcoin for a list of methods. For beginner Bitcoin users, yiff.party recommends using an escrow service such as LocalBitcoins.

Dacad's Primeleap

undoReturn
1531197089.dacad_2018_07_10_899_883.png (690.9KiB, 878x883) save_alt

I've never been a fan of Primeleap, and with a good animator using it, it's certainly disheartening. I want to support the artist, but Patreon isn't the way I'd choose to do so. Has Primeleap been solved as a second drm layer yet?

People used to have success using Photoshop's Smart Blur, but the watermarking methods keep on changing and no one can keep up.
Best option for now is to simply starve primefags out until the lost revenue, extra effort, and lower art quality is no longer worth it.

hard to starve an artist from a leaked content site. what can we do. not pay them? we do that already

>>55811
Give me list of state-of-the-art methods that they use, I think for everything that they try to use, someone would make countermeasures in GitHub.

>>55811
Indeed, it appears way beyond that now. The effort to outrage ratio can't keep up, so people aren't interested to breaking it. Sooner or later they just pay the artist and grab their stuff yearly.

>>55855
Also eating a fat ban on the way out, but mission accomplished!

You can't blur out primeleap's image stenography. I had this argument a LOT of times on u18chan with the fucking idiots over there who cry that they 'removed all watermarks' but still got b&.

Simple fact is, the artists give primeleap the PSDs, and then Primeleap's algorithm (or some sad 350 pound neckbeard) deliberately moves background elements or whatever in a way that is unique to each individual user.

https://u18chan.com/uploads/data/13325/wew_2_u18chan.gif

The shit has different positions for each user. Unless you have access to the PSDs and can move elements around the page freely, you'll never beat the primeleap 'stenography'. It's gone way, way beyond watermarks at this point. They don't need to change their watermarking methods, EVER, because without access to the PSDs, even if you have multiple accounts and attempt to manipulate the images, it's still trivially easy to see which accounts the original images came from.

I'd wager that they've done the PSD shuffling from the very fucking start, but people are just willfully ignorant even when the evidence is presented right in front of their fucking faces. They move elements of the image. You can't beat the shit. Stop washing out superficial watermarks and thinking you 'beat' the issue. That's like wiping the paintjob off a NSA tracker attached to your car and thinking the underlying GPS isn't going to keep tracking you.

It's fucking moronic.

Until someone comes up with a way to move all of the individual elements in the picture in a way that doesn't fuck up the background, you can't beat this stenography. Your only hope is burner accounts and leaked content every few months.

>>55866
ha, every few months, try every year. That's the last time someone leaked blitz content, January 2019.

I agree that attempting to bypass the stenography is futile. Regarding Primeleap in particular, I've had the idea of "sacrificial imports" in my head for a while, but I never really did anything because Primeleap still only has a handful of creators.

I understand that people are reluctant to leak Primeleap content because it makes the associated payment info unusable when pledging to any other Primeleap creators -- is that still the case?

If so, that can easily be fixed. Patreon by no means blocks every form of disposable debit card, so if you combine that with the idea of pledging and leaking on the last day of each month, where's the problem exactly?

>>55877
>That's the last time someone leaked blitz content, January 2019.

From what I understand, no prep was done prior to that

>>55886

Wouldn't you still have to provide your private information to Primeleap even with throwaway bank cards? I would assume with the amount of work that went into this system, they would have covered a loophole like that and considering Patreon's early history with being exploited with workarounds, I would think the guys behind Primeleap planned ahead for things like this.

>>55930
Patreon yes, but not Primeleap. I'm pretty sure creators don't get access to patrons' payment info.

>>55934
They do.
Creators tried to hide it but someone leaked that info. It's gotten quiet ever since.

they don’t need access to billing information. If they add someone to the blacklist inside Patreon, then Patreon will not accept money from this account for the one who sent him to the blacklist. So artists can block the payment method, not knowing the actual data of the payer.
At the same time, they exchange this information with each other, simply sending a link to the suspect’s account.
All you need to know for such a block - his Patreon ID.

and deleting account after getting into this list is useless - the payment method will still be blocked. And even deleting an account until it is blacklisted will not work. Artists have a list of those who made the payment and can be added to the blacklist simply by checking the box with the name you need in this list. Even a deleted account will not disappear from the too list.

>>55944
Which is why I suggested using disposable cards. The service I use for them works with Patreon, and even if it didn't, that can also be bypassed by adding them to a throwaway PayPal account.

Primeleap seems like someone using a sledgehammer to put a nail in drywall. It seems like entirely too much security for what it is. I can understand Blitzdrachin using it due to what type of person she is, but I didn't think Dacad would follow suit with this. The work they do is great, but a lot of their stuff is animated. How does Primeleap affect animated items, or is that free from their stenography? I can't imagine it would work on something as complicated as an animation.

>>55963
Wouldn't be too difficult to have some kind of animation-based stenography added.

You'd have to find two different people pledged to him, and compare their animations side by side to see any differences.

1573825893532.jpg (187.2KiB, 1024x792) save_alt

>NNNNNOOOOOOOOOO MY PRIMELEAP ACCOUNT GOT BANNED!!!!!!
so what's the problem bros? just make a new one

>>56008
The new ones get banned too, they collect a lot of information so they know who is who when they sign up again.

>>56019
what kind of information? also what the fuck is going on with paywall retards that caused this to exist?

>>55886
>>55963
>>55981
https://github.com/DominicBreuker/stego-toolkit try cracking it with this, see what happens... do we even have data on this?
But then again, the best way to destroy them from the bottom up is to spread the word about their behavior.
>>56019
So I guess they also do IP, or maybe even worse browser cookies and metadata fingerprinting... I don't think MAC is on the table yet.

the amount of tech-illiterate boomers in this thread, lmao

so what if they ban your IP, are you seriously too dumb to use a proxy and a fake name generator? this is LAUGHABLY easy to bypass with throwaway accounts

The issue here is that we don't really have anyone willing to use throwaway accounts to gather all of this. So few Patreon creators use it, it's a bit of a hassle. I certainly would love to see Dacad's work, and see Primeleap disappear, though.

>>56025
IP gets banned
ISP gives me a new one every few hours because their modems are shit and keep rebooting randomly

i made an account bros, let me know if there's anyone else you want leaked

>>55866
It looks as though there are only a finite amount of elements with a finite amount of positions (which can probably be thwarted or confounded by small modifications to the canvas size or the image itself). What is it about this that translates into usable data? Coordinates only mean so much, so how about a proof of concept? I'm not asking for the specific implementation they're using, of course.

>>56333
Nigga u serious?

>What is it about this that translates into usable data?

Are you retarded?

You could fucking EYEBALL leaked images and figure out who leaked them. Fucking 'change the canvas size'. Oh yeah, that's gonna fool an algorithm for about ten seconds until the person behind the algorithm goes 'lol you're a fucking idiot' and just manually checks the leaked image.

The more y'all talk about this, the less I'm convinced anyone is doing anything. Just keep on yapping, but no one acually shows progress.

Patrick jazz.jpg (12.2KiB, 480x360) save_alt

Blitzdrachin no longer uses Primleap

I wonder if the site will cause a bunch of former control-freak former Popufurs that strangled themselves to death out of spite against people posting their artwork to rise up from the dead/obscurity and return

this creator still uplodes all thare stuff to primeleap https://yiff.party/patreon/13007171

>>56444
>You could fucking EYEBALL leaked images and figure out who leaked them.
Prove it by giving us a proof of concept.

>Fucking 'change the canvas size'. Oh yeah, that's gonna fool an algorithm for about ten seconds
>how do algorithms work

>until the person behind the algorithm goes 'lol you're a fucking idiot' and just manually checks the leaked image.
What makes you think the artist can get data the program can't? If it's ruined for the program, it's also ruined the artist.

929177AE-AB98-48BD-B785-9BD297DB3E2C_u18chan.jpg (183.3KiB, 960x1280) save_alt

>>56671
Okay genius. Take the censorship on this image, and move it all half the distance of its radius off centre. Draw everything underneath the censor pixel perfect to the uncensored image.

Oh, you can't? BECAUSE YOU CAN'T FUCKING SEE WHAT IS UNDER THE CENSOR? Funny how that fucking works, isn't it?

Now how the fuck would you redraw Addy's body under the wing such that someone eyeballing it and comparing it to the original image wouldn't know EXACTLY where the wing was sitting in the edited image without any assisted tools at all?

Sef has less than a thousand patreons. They'd only need to figure out the approximate location of two or the three of the original marks to uniquely identify who leaked the images. They have TEN in each image.

You'd need to have three accounts, or more, and not even stitch the images together. You'd have to individually alter each and every moving element, patch in the background from a different account to fill in the gaps, and do that for all ten moving elements on the page. Miss any single one of them, and the single unique location would probably be enough for you to lose that account. And what is this bullshit,

>What makes you think the artist can get data the program can't?

Are you actually retarded? If you alter the canvas size to alter the algorithmic information, that's like changing the canvas size on a jpeg image or adding a slight filter so that a computer program doesn't recognize it. A person can still come along and compare the images WITH THEIR FUCKING EYES and see that they're the same exact thing. 'Oh look, the wing is moved this far in this leaked image, I'll just go through and find all the accounts that received an image with the wing moved exactly that far' and boom, you're fucking done.

And you wonder why you fucking boomers keep getting banned.

>>56840
>Draw everything underneath the censor pixel perfect to the uncensored image.
Why?

>They'd only need to figure out the approximate location
>approximate

>of two or the three of the original marks to uniquely identify who leaked the images
Still waiting for that proof of concept.

>If you alter the canvas size to alter the algorithmic information, that's like changing the canvas size on a jpeg image or adding a slight filter so that a computer program doesn't recognize it. A person can still come along and compare the images WITH THEIR FUCKING EYES and see that they're the same exact thing.
Then what's the point of the program?

>'Oh look, the wing is moved this far in this leaked image, I'll just go through and find all the accounts that received an image with the wing moved exactly that far'
>exactly that far
>exactly

>>56840
LOL, Hoes mad.

>>56854
>Why?
Because otherwise they can see exactly where the wing was and uniquely identify the account through that stenographic element alone, you stupid fucking boomer.

>Still waiting for that proof of concept.
I don't need to provide a 'proof of concept' you stupid fucking boomer. They came up with the system that clearly uses moving elements to create stenography. YOU have to come up with a proof of concept that beats that. Considering you're an tech-illiterate boomer judging from your sheer inability to understand how moving elements work, you can't. Until you can come up with something that can identify and obfuscate the moving elements in the picture. YOU have to come up with a proof of concept. 'Hurr durr resizing the canvas would totally work and you can't provide a proof of concept proving it wouldn't even though changing the canvas size does literally nothing to change the stenography used hurr durr' - fucking boomer.

>Then what's the point of the program?
To catch people with automation. But if you use one account to leak shit it's only going to take one person at Primeleap saying 'hey lets just ban this person' and doing it all manually. They give enough of a shit to make a system like this, then they give enough of a shit to spend the ten full minutes it would take to do a side-by-side comparison of all sent images or animations and match the stenographic elements.

t;;dr fuck off boomer, you're too stupid for this conversation.

>make throwaway account
problem solved

Disappointed to see Dacad using Primeleap now.

>>56906
>Because otherwise they can see exactly where the wing was and uniquely identify the account through that stenographic element alone
Down to the pixel? Then it's not something artists can casually eyeball and get an ID, per >>56840.

>I don't need to provide a 'proof of concept' you stupid fucking boomer.
>They came up with the system that clearly uses moving elements to create stenography.
Pick one.

>To catch people with automation.
And how would that work if their algorithm is thwarted by adjustments they can't account for? If you're still going to insist that this isn't a problem, then we'll need that proof of concept.

>But if you use one account to leak shit it's only going to take one person at Primeleap saying 'hey lets just ban this person' and doing it all manually.
Again, what was the point of the program if they're just going to do it manually?

>They give enough of a shit to make a system like this, then they give enough of a shit to spend the ten full minutes it would take to do a side-by-side comparison of all sent images or animations and match the stenographic elements
How do you think they can keep track of every combination of every element in every image, so they can associate it with every supporter? A proof of concept would explain this easily.

>t;;dr fuck off boomer, you're too stupid for this conversation.
I'm not the one struggling to produce a proof of concept for a theory that's too complicated for artists to effectively implement. This manner of incompetent fear-mongering is why everybody is afraid to leak things from Primeleap.

>>56941

I already showed the 'proof of concept'. It's literally a gif. If you open it in another window, it's going to move. I know moving images are a bit fucking much for people of your advanced age and senility to understand, but if you look at it closely, it's going to show you the stenographic differences in the images. Or are you sincerely so fucking stupid as to think that they made sliding elements in the images just for shits and giggles and it's NOT part of the stenography?

>I'm not the one struggling to produce a proof of concept for a theory that's too complicated for artists to effectively implement.

Oh yeah, 'too comnplicated' except, you dumb fucking boomer, we can see it in action. We have literal evidence of them doing it. 'But it's too complicated!!!!!!'. I'm sorry, boomer, but the kids these days are playing with tech you're too fucking senile to understand. Otherwise, you come up with a proof of concept of why the images have sliding elements not related to stenography.

Every single person that's leaked from primeleap has been banned. This is after using proxies, throwing images through the FUCKING SHREDDER so they look like a meme that's been reposted too many times, jpeged to the point of being unrecognizable, and STILL been banned.

And then we find out that elements of the images move from one part of the page to the other.

HMMMMMMMMMM. Can we put 2+ 2 together here? I'm going to spell it out for you, boomer. It's 4. It equals 4. 2 + 2 is 4. The moving elements are the stenography you troglodyte. Rattle those fucking rocks you have for brains and try to keep up with the rest of us here. It's not 'fearmongering' when you understand how the stenography works and how fucking ridiculously difficult it is to just 'bypass' it. If it was as easy as resizing a fucking canvas, then why has every single leaker so far been banned?

I reiterate, you're too stupid for this conversation. Fuck off, boomer.

>>56947
>I already showed the 'proof of concept'. It's literally a gif
>The moving elements are the stenography
Every element in that gif has enough to it that they can be manipulated in Photoshop. Regardless, what you offered doesn't translate into a method that converts position data into any form of ID. Your insistence that an artist can ID a leaker just by eyeballing it means that any artist that actually attempts to implement this cares nothing about the data necessary to ID leakers. Retarded, huh?

>if you look at it closely, it's going to show you the stenographic differences in the images
Differences there may be, but you've yet to actually demonstrate stenographic value. You're just as retarded as an artist who honestly sees this as a reliable way to ID leakers (especially if we're meant to believe that an ID can be made by just eyeballing a given image).

>'But it's too complicated!!!!!!'
Number of elements in image x number of patrons x number of images to be manipulated = An increasingly large value, where a given artist will eventually lose track of it all.

>Every single person that's leaked from primeleap has been banned.
Because they were being retarded about it.

>If it was as easy as resizing a fucking canvas, then why has every single leaker so far been banned?
Who tried messing with the canvas?

>I reiterate, you're too stupid for this conversation
I reiterate that you're still unable to prove this concept because it can't be effectively implemented, and that pushing this is still unnecessary fearmongering that discourages further leaks. To that, I say shut up until you can back you shit up.

>>55877
No need to 'leak' Blitzdrachin's content if she's no actually on Primeleap anymore lmao

>>57191

I mean the original stenographic idea was to have a single randomly chosen pixel in the image changed a few points up or down the colour scale to uniquely identify who leaked the image, but parts of the image being moved can't possible be being used to identify people! You don't have any EVIDENCE of that and can't provide a PROOF OF CONCEPT even though it's literally as easy as a fucking plaintext file with L=5 X=4550 Y=5670 written in it.

'Oh but change the canvas size!' except you can still set the leaked image transparency to 50% and compare it 1:1 to the original image and cycle through each image until you find the one that matches and oh no, you've found the leaker manually and it only took you ten minutes! Even with THOUSANDS of images to compare to you can still just cross-reference them easy as fuck.

And even if you know all the moving parts of the image, you have to then perfectly recreate the background down to the pixel or a close examination of the leaked image will have the guy chasing the leakers say 'oh look, this element was clearly moved' and then they move it back to where it was original was and then manually compare it to all the files sent out to people and BOOM, YOU'RE CAUGHT, BOOMER.

You can't even CONCEIVE that moving layers could have a stenography value attached to them because you're too much of a stupid fucking boomer to get it through your thick skull that this is LITERALLY what they're doing. Please, fuck off. I've run out of crayons to explain this very simple concept to you. We have evidence of them moving the elements of the image. We know all the leakers get banned. We know that moving elements of the images can have stenographic value (because we're not ignorant fucking boomers like you) and your suggestions are like the old guy trying to help someone perfect their rocket launching technique by saying 'well why don't you just add more boosters to it?' GEE WHY DIDN'T WE THINK OF THAT.

Fuck off, boomer.

>>57237
>I mean the original stenographic idea was to have a single randomly chosen pixel in the image changed a few points up or down the colour scale to uniquely identify who leaked the image
But you're the one pushing the notion that canvas changes can be defeated by merely eyeballing the differences. Pixels clearly mean nothing here.

>'Oh but change the canvas size!' except you can still set the leaked image transparency to 50% and compare it 1:1 to the original image and cycle through each image until you find the one that matches and oh no, you've found the leaker manually
Not without some kind of external reference you haven't, and definitely not if you're using a program that moves these elements itself. Theory is fun, but we're still waiting on that proof of concept.

>And even if you know all the moving parts of the image, you have to then perfectly recreate the background down to the pixel or a close examination of the leaked image will have the guy chasing the leakers say 'oh look, this element was clearly moved'
You want artists to be able to ID leakers just by eyeballing differences, yet you also want to operate at the pixel level. How do you think the elements are being moved?

>You can't even CONCEIVE that moving layers could have a stenography value attached to them because
You've yet to demonstrate the concept, and you can't as long as you're trying to go both ways with this theory.

>We have evidence of them moving the elements of the image. We know all the leakers get banned. We know that moving elements of the images can have stenographic value
Really? Because all I see is a GIF someone made after photoshopping each frame; and a bunch of idiots being careless with leaks. Do you really believe correlation always equals causation?

>Please, fuck off. I've run out of crayons to explain this very simple concept to you.
You never had any crayons to begin with. Fuck off until you're actually ready to back your shit up.

>>57347
Yeah, this is a troll. Nobody alive is legitimately this fucking stupid.

So is this thread acually gonna talk about beating primeleap or is it just a dumpster fire like all the previous ones?

And y'all wonder why no one bothers beating primeleap, who actually gives a shit, better to complain than do anything, easier too it seems.

>>57392
I legit thinks that someone is literally screwing with this thread so PrimeLeap does not get beaten.

>>57396
Yeah, fuckhead up there wants nothing short of the source code of Primeleap's DRM before he'll even conceive that that is how they're catching people. He's a bad actor. No fucking doubt about it.

The amount of effort it would take to defeat all of the drm is ridiculous. All we can hope for it someone to just leak once a month.

>>57385
>offers reasonable doubt
>Yeah, this is a troll
I told you to fuck off with your fearmongering, and to not come back until you have an actual proof of concept (like >>8997, for an old method of grabbing images directly from the server).

>>57396
Yeah, seeing as >>25031 was ultimately too much for Blitzdrachin, I gotta wonder how retarded one must be to think that theory has any viability in practice.

>>57422
>Yeah, fuckhead up there wants nothing short of the source code of Primeleap's DRM
Nobody asked for anything of the sort. If you can't express it mathematically, then you have nothing but a mere hunch based of a GIF with manually edited frames. >>24712.

>The amount of effort it would take to defeat all of the drm is ridiculous
Inventing ridiculous, unsubstantiated DRM isn't helping. >>25652.

>>57444
Okay, boomer.

For anyone else reading this thread with your actual head screwed on straight: ignore the retard saying they don't do it. He wants you to get banned. He is a shill and a parasite.

We can easily show that they alter locations of layers.

In fact: https://i.imgur.com/fUtZj5B.mp4

Here's a bunch of pages compared to the actual release. They're all altered by a program that moves shit around as a form of stenography. No matter how you alter the images, unless you move those specific elements from their positions, they can be used to uniquely identify you.

Do NOT let this dumb motherfucker gaslight you into thinking that this shit is being made up. You can't just 'photoshop' something and move it from one part of the page to the other while perfectly recreating the area underneath it. The fact that the dude even suggests it proves that he's a bad actor in every sense of the word.

Just LOOK at the amount of movement in this fucking comparison: https://i.imgur.com/qOcrKqi.gif

Do not let this dumb nigger gaslight you.

>>57457
no one is listening hes replying to himself like a psycho

>>57457
Not any of the other people you're talking to, but if you had multiple versions of the same page from different people/accounts, cutting out the elements and moving them around yourself while using the differences in the different versions to fill holes in photoshop or whatever would be absolutely trivial. The problem was no one wanted to go through the coordination to make that happen.

>>57487
The problem is doing that, and knowing that the elements you've moved are ALL of the moving elements. If someone figures out how to bypass all of this bullshit, then the best thing they can do is

SHUT THE FUCK UP.

Leak the content every time it's posted but never, ever discuss it. The reason Primeleap have gotten so sophisticated in the ways they track people down is that they read threads like this too. It's in their interest to. If someone manages to crack their DRM and can leak safely, they should keep that shit under wraps until the exact point when they know they've been caught and there's no harm in revealing it.

Hell, Bernal got the original idea for the very first ever furry image DRM from 'what ifs' people were throwing around in a thread about him on u18chan.

Back on to the cutting out images and shit: I think some program that averages out differences might help. That way, even if they know what elements were moved, and even if they compare 1:1 the different superficial watermarks (floating circles and shit) if you put the moving elements in a neutral spot and then average three different images together, the result will be maybe a little bit blurry, but the superficial drm will be obliterated.

But since Dacad's work is in animation, there's a whole lot more complexity. There's going to be a whole lot of different ways they can insert drm into the animation that will be hard to alter, and I don't even want to list the ones I can think of off since it'll just lead to another situation like Bernal.

I haven't seen many people banned for leaking Crittermattic's animations, but that's all 3d. Dacad does 2d drawn work which is infinitely easier to alter procedurally.

>>57457
>https://i.imgur.com/fUtZj5B.mp4
>https://i.imgur.com/qOcrKqi.gif
Things that a motivated artist can easily produce without needing to implement fake steganograghy.

>They're all altered by a program that moves shit around as a form of stenography.
Why, when artists like Blitzdrachin can't even handle >>25031, would an artist go through such herculean effort when it's easier just to bait you like this?

>No matter how you alter the images, unless you move those specific elements from their positions, they can be used to uniquely identify you.
Give us an example of how that would work or GTFO.

>You can't just 'photoshop' something and move it from one part of the page to the other while perfectly recreating the area underneath it. The fact that the dude even suggests it proves that he's a bad actor in every sense of the word.
You're the only one raising this point, despite insisting that the artist can ID a leaker just from eyeballing the differences. Make up your mind.

>>57499
>The reason Primeleap have gotten so sophisticated in the ways they track people down is that they read threads like this too. It's in their interest to.
Just as it is in their self-imposed interest to give us such red herrings. Without a proof of concept, as we've seen others actually offer, insisting on this just makes you look like a (needlessly) guilty artist.

>I haven't seen many people banned for leaking Crittermattic's animations
literally who

are-you-on-drugs.jpg (94.4KiB, 644x353) save_alt

>>57237
>your suggestions are like the old guy trying to help someone perfect their rocket launching technique by saying 'well why don't you just add more boosters to it?
<

>>57444
>you have nothing but a mere hunch based of a GIF with manually edited frames
>>57457
>We can easily show that they alter locations of layers.

>calls Anon a shill and a parasite while not backing his shit up
>>57499
>The problem is doing that, and knowing that the elements you've moved are ALL of the moving elements
>implying the system is this robust
Is there something you would like to admit?

>>57603
I have soundly refuted and explained literally everything you said. Either you're too retarded to understand simple processes, or you're just here to gaslight.

In either case, fuck off. You're not convincing anyone by taking very simple shit that has concrete evidence. You can fucking check it yourself. Go to the thread on u18chan, find the leaked images after a certain page (you can literally pinpoint the page where they started using the new stenography) and compare them to the public releases. Unless you're so retarded that you think the artist themself was secretly leaking their own work months in advance of the public release just to implant the suggestions of a new drm style that doesn't actually exist to... WHAT FUCKING END? MORON?

Jeeesus christ you are legitimately the most stupid person I have ever met. I've seen more thoughtful responses fucking fucking cleverbot. Just fuck off, boomer. You're either legitimately retarded or you're here specifically to gaslight. Those are the only two options, because anyone who had a pair of brain cells to bang together would have understand the very simple concept by this point. I'm done responding to you. Enjoy shouting into the void 'BUH BUH NO PROOF OF CONCEPT'' even though the concept was cogently explained to you and then evidence of said concept in action was given.

'It's just photoshop!' followed by 'nobody else is talking about photoshop except you!' but if you scroll up two fucking pages you can easily read where you said 'Because all I see is a GIF someone made after photoshopping each frame'. That's fucking anti-vaccer logic right there. Yeah, all hard evidence of something happening is just made up! It's make-believe! Leaked images from over twelve months ago are all just propaganda placed there! It's a conspiracy!

Fuck off, Primeleap. You're fooling nobody.

I don't post here. I just come to watch you guys argue. This is some good stuff. It's like watching people back-and-forth over Bigfoot in San Andreas all over again.

>>57607
Do the groundwork yourself then, fuckhead. Go find the thread, here, I'll give you a link: https://u18chan.com/board/u18chan/f/topic/1175112

Go to any leaked image after page 146. Compare it to ANY of the publicly released images. Notice the bubbles go missing and elements like speech bubbles, onomatopoeia and the like all move as well? FUNNY THAT, ISN'T IT?

Are you retards actually expecting anyone to believe this shit? That someone leaked shit with timestamps on a completely different website just to make up a fucking drm that doesn't exist? Are you this RETARDED?

>you have nothing but a mere hunch based of a GIF with manually edited frames

Nigga all I did was put two images into a gif creator. You can easily find the original images yourself. The first is on u18chan, in the thread links, the second is the public release. From e-hentai, specifically. Go find the originals, tell me I edited them.

>We can easily show that they alter locations of layers.

I literally just put the two pages next to each other in gif form so you can see the locations of the layers changing. If you can't understand what your eyes are showing you, that's on you. Go recreate it yourself. Open them both in a new tab at normal zoom, and then swap back and forth. The differences become real apparent real fast. Unless I'm photoshopping the images in between you opening them! Fucking x-files level conspiracy over here.

>implying the system is this robust

>implying the comparisons of pages showing multiple moved elements in the images leaked a year ago are somehow fake

Fucking. Retarded. Never go full potato.

Try it your goddamn self, here's two links to shit I haven't touched, unless I'm some NSA-level pro hacker and can control the artist's own page somehow:

https://exhentai.org/s/3100550aef/1552304-145 compared to http://www.furaffinity.net/view/29909504/

https://exhentai.org/s/48d0ee768b/1552304-146 compared to http://www.furaffinity.net/view/29909672/

https://exhentai.org/s/b7a82cfc03/1552304-147 compared to http://www.furaffinity.net/view/30102588/

Don't take my fucking word for it though. Check it yourself. Any image that doesn't have the 'free' tag on the bottom left is a leak from primeleap, and they ALL show stenography, including moving elements on the pages. The only people who don't understand and accept this fact at this point are gaslighting. There's just no other explanation.

You know, unless I'm this 'centarion' motherfucking on exhentai and ALSO sefieren and have been slowly building galleries on exhentai since 2013 (the first gallery posted by said user) just to convince some rando fucks on the internet that some new form of drm had been developed when it actually hadn't.

You fucking retards.

>>57610
>Do the groundwork yourself then, fuckhead
Why? This is your case.

>Go to any leaked image after page 146. Compare it to ANY of the publicly released images. Notice the bubbles go missing and elements like speech bubbles, onomatopoeia and the like all move as well? FUNNY THAT, ISN'T IT?
Yeah, I bet Sefeiren is having quite the laugh.

>Nigga all I did was put two images into a gif creator.
Exactly.

>Unless I'm photoshopping the images in between you opening them! Fucking x-files level conspiracy over here.
Lay off the drugs, man.

>implying the comparisons of pages showing multiple moved elements in the images leaked a year ago are somehow fake
>implying moving only one element doesn't give the artist a false read

>>57611
Get a load of this schitzo.

>>57608
>I have soundly refuted and explained literally everything you said.
>>57603
>Why, would an artist go through such herculean effort when it's easier just to bait you like this?

>You're not convincing anyone by taking very simple shit that has concrete evidence.
Concrete evidence that there's been layer manipulation, and that's it. Continuing to obsess about these differences doesn't solve the problems that would be solved with an actual proof of concept (which you're trying oddly hard to avoid producing).

>Jeeesus christ you are legitimately the most stupid person I have ever met.
Nothing you've said changes this artist's interest in giving us easy red herrings (compared to actually implementing this mostly undefined system of yours), but go ahead and continue to pretend you're not the retard here.

>Enjoy shouting into the void 'BUH BUH NO PROOF OF CONCEPT'' even though the concept was cogently explained to you
An explanation alone doesn't mean it's viable. When there are multiple explanations for something, it becomes important to actually prove your position. Going on about these differences doesn't translate into worthwhile examples of any hypothetical implementation of this concept; and your failure to do so means you don't know what you're talking about.

>and then evidence of said concept in action was given.
>muh differences

>'It's just photoshop!' followed by 'nobody else is talking about photoshop except you!'
I was talking about the pixel bullshit you got into without a prompt. Mischarcterizing my remarks doesn't help your case.

Screenshot_146.png (479.0KiB, 466x466) save_alt

>>57725

A reaction image is about all your response is worth.

https://i.imgur.com/bbKRrPu.gif

Oh look, two leaked images compared to the actual released on and none of them are the same. They are all unique.

I've got all the evidence on my side, fuckhead. You're gonna have to come with something a little more substantial than 'that's just a red herring!' to convince anyone with more than single-digit IQ that they're not using later stenography. Especially considering that the amount of effort it would take to create to a red herring of this level is the same amount of effort it would take to send a unique image out to every single patreon... which is exactly what the stenography system is.

You really are a dumb nigger.

>>57731
>Oh look, two leaked images compared to the actual released on and none of them are the same. They are all unique.
Real freakin' neato. Any artist can manually produce images with differences. Where's an example algorithm for a program that automatically produces these differences, while at the same time making the changes obvious enough to allow an artist to catch leakers by eyeballing the differences? Why, with such a system, would the pixels matter? Where's the proposed algorithm that translates these differences into data with such a human readable output?

>You're gonna have to come with something a little more substantial than 'that's just a red herring!
>>57603
>Why, when artists like Blitzdrachin can't even handle >>25031, would an artist go through such herculean effort when it's easier just to bait you like this?
>>25652

>I've got all the evidence on my side, fuckhead.
>muh differences

>which is exactly what the stenography system is
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steganography

>You really are a dumb nigger.
I'm the one denying this artist's interest and ability to give us false leads, causing posts like >>24713:
>this is a example of what is either the new watermark (8x and sharpened, isn't really that noticable otherwise but my monitors colors are shit), or me being paranoid about some speckles leftover from a stray pen brush
Stay retarded.

>>57828
>Where's an example algorithm

Make one yourself. I'm not your fucking mother. Just because you can't conceive that something can be happening, doesn't mean I need to produce an algorithm when we have direct evidence of it happening. I can't fucking produce an algorithm that inserts usernames in to images but we sure as fuck know it was happening, retard.

>>Why, when artists like Blitzdrachin can't even handle >>25031, would an artist go through such herculean effort when it's easier just to bait you like this?

Because it was attempted stenography, fuckhead: making large changes that can't be easily reversed without extensive complicated image manipulation. Which is EXACTLY what moving image elements is. Funny that. Retard. Oh but BLITZ FUCKING DRACHIN can't do it so that's somehow evidence that nobody else can? Are you legitimately retarded?

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steganography

Bringing up the dictionary definition of stenography just makes you look like more of a retard. I was referring, very specifically, to THIS kind of stenography. So either you're deliberately being ignorant or you're so retarded you think a wikipedia page is somehow a rebuttal? You're retarded.

>I'm the one denying this artist's interest and ability to give us false leads, causing posts like

Nah dumb nigger, you're the one claiming that artists are INCAPABLE of procedurally moving layers around to create unique images because you haven't seen the fucking algorithm they use. You are legit retarded. Like you'll watch someone drop something, and then say 'well I haven't seen an algorithm for gravity so I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S REAL'.

JALKbZQ.png (21.2KiB, 685x548) save_alt

>a program that automatically produces these differences, while at the same time making the changes obvious enough to allow an artist to catch leakers by eyeballing the differences? Why, with such a system, would the pixels matter? Where's the proposed algorithm that translates these differences into data with such a human readable output?

Time to dismantle this retarded argument for the last fucking time, since you're physically INCAPABLE of understanding simple concepts, I'm going to get my best box of crayons and explain it to you, retard.

>eyeballing the differences?

Because if you just change the canvas size, if you set the leakead image transparency to 50%, you can directly compare it, 1:1, to all the other images sent out and find out who got the unique page that has the same alignment of moving objects. That's how an artist can EYEBALL the differences. Something similar is happening in the gifs I showed! Because when you have an image automatically overlayed or switching really fast, the differences are very, very, very easy to see. And if there's NO differences that's also easy to see! Retard.

>Why, with such a system, would the pixels matter?

Retard, an image is made up of PIXELS. They're very tiny. You'll have to lean super fucking close to your screen to see them. But if an artist is moving layers procedurally, even if the leaker manually moves the elements of the image around, the artist can still ZOOM IN and look at the pixels and figure out where it was moved from, because the PIXELS will be visibly different to the PIXELS of the original image. Then they can reset the location of the moving element. Like in the image I attached to this post. If you try to move any of those boxes, I'm going to be able to figure out, within 1-2 pixels, exactly where they were moved from. Because you have to know what is underneath them exactly to recreate the underlying image to the point where the altered areas don't give it away. Retard.

index.jpg (13.1KiB, 204x203) save_alt

>>57828
And as for your frankly smooth-brained suggestions that this is all an elaborate red herring;

I found six separate images that were leaked by two different people. And compared to the original publicly released image, they all show stenography. I can give you links and page numbers and you can do your own fucking groundwork! So for this to be a red herring, you have to posit one of four scenarios:
A) All leakers are primeleap. This is retarded for obvious reasons.
B) Primeleap knew exactly who the leakers were, and instead of banning them, instead sent them manually edited files to... something. This is retarded because it makes no fucking sense.
C) Sef manually edited 600+ images to make every single one of them unique, and did for... however many pages I can find that were leaked. I'll go check the exact number so you understand how retarded this assertion is! Pages 142-182. All of them have this particular stenography in them.
And finally:
D) Primeleap has this capability but doesn't use it as stenography. This is a retarded assertion because, like I pointed out before, you can just set the transparency to 50% and manually check each image. There's less than 700 patreons these days. They could check it manually against each image in under ten minutes.

Pick one, fuckhead. Because for this to be a red herring, one of those has to be part of the explanation. And they're all incredibly retarded.

Now if you're done with the retardation, boomer retard, I'm going to put my crayons away because the 2000 character limit here makes it quite unenjoyable to explain simple concepts to retards.

>Picture related. It's you.

Man fuck this, y'all just doing exactly what they want and primeleap is gonna last forever thanks to you fucks complaining and not acually beating it.

You are both hired shrills 100% to distract us all.

why the fuck is one guy replying to himself over and over?

>>57914
Because there's a 2000 character limit, and when a retard needs very simple concepts explained to them in such excruciating detail before they'll get it through their thick skulls, it often takes more than 2000 characters.

Don't worry, the boomer will be back soon with some other inane attempt to gaslight everyone into thinking Primeleap doesn't use the stenography it very obvious uses, and that it can't be possible because HE thinks it's too complicated and I can't produce an algorithm that could do it even though I literally pointed out it's as simple as 'Layer=# X=# Y+#' in a fucking notepad file.

This nigga wants everyone trying to leak Primeleap content to get banned. I fucking hate Primeleap. So every time he comes in here spewing his shilling I'm going to explain it in the most simple, retard-friendly ways possible so that the people leaking don't keep making the same fucking mistakes they've been making for the last year.

>>57829
>Make one yourself.
This isn't my case.
>Because it was attempted stenography, fuckhead
And when artists can't handle properly handle simpler methods, what makes you think they're capable of such complicated ones?
>Bringing up the dictionary definition of stenography just makes you look like more of a retard.
You're the one suggesting that these movements can only be steganography.
>Nah dumb nigger, you're the one claiming that artists are INCAPABLE of procedurally moving layers around to create unique images because you haven't seen the fucking algorithm they use
When did I say that? What makes you think their methods will always produce unique methods, that there can be no confusion from just eyeballing it?
>even if the leaker manually moves the elements of the image around, the artist can still ZOOM IN
That throws your eyeballing parameter out the window.

>>57835
>I found six separate images that were leaked by two different people. And compared to the original publicly released image
Congratulations. Not much of a sample size, though.
>So for this to be a red herring
You'd have to the PSDs and a number of places to upload to fakes to in order to pull off this kind of trolling.
>I'm going to put my crayons away
You still never had any to begin with, coomer.

>>57852
>implying arguments never solve problems
If you want to waste time trying to solve a what could just be trolling, that's on you. Keep in mind I'm not the one pushing such ridiculous ideas. >>24712

>>57938
>Primeleap doesn't use the stenography it very obvious uses
>and that it can't be possible
No one said it was impossible.
>HE thinks it's too complicated and I can't produce an algorithm that could do it
Too complicated to be worthwhile, asshole. This manner of fearmongering is why people are unwilling to explore methods to deal with the methods Primeleap actually uses.
>even though I literally pointed out it's as simple as 'Layer=# X=# Y+#' in a fucking notepad file.
When? And what part of that allows the artist to keep track of it all? >>57191 re: the increasingly large value expressing how much the artist would need to keep up with.
>I fucking hate Primeleap
You have a funny way of acting like it, continuing to push this unsubstantiated theory despite having been told multiple times to fuck off until you actually have something that furthers this idea. >>25652
>I'm going to explain it in the most simple, retard-friendly ways possible
Imagine being so retarded that would you despite not knowing what you're talking about. >>57828
>Where's the proposed algorithm that translates these differences into data with such a human readable output?

>>57941
>And when artists can't handle properly handle simpler methods, what makes you think they're capable of such complicated ones?
Artist A can't do it so Artist B can't do it either! You're a retard.
>You're the one suggesting that these movements can only be steganography.
And you literally can't come up with any reason why the parts of images would move between different user accounts, because there IS NO OTHER EXPLANATION you fucking retard.
>That throws your eyeballing parameter out the window.
You dumb fucking nigger I literally just explained this works in exhaustive details and if you're still not getting it you're either retarded or trolling. There's no two ways about it at this point. Compare two images against each other = eyeballing it, retard.
>Congratulations. Not much of a sample size, though.
Enough to prove a fuck of a lot more than you can refute with 'buh muh red herring' fuckface.
>ridiculous ideas.
Only in your retarded estimation. I see something that looks like a duck, smells like a duck, meets the definition of a duck, is taxonomically identified as a duck, and tastes like a fucking duck, I'm going to say it's a goddamn duck.

>>57949
Honestly, I've so exhaustively refuted every single retarded thing you've come up with I'm not even going to bother replying to your inane, retarded ideas any more. I'm just repeating the same shit over and over again seeing if the way I word it can penetrate that thick fucking skull of yours.

They're using layer stenography. Read my previous comments to get all the evidence you need of that.

You're not going to convince any rational people otherwise, Primeleap. Fuck off. You lost.

10 minutes to id a leaker is way too long. The tools to move picture elements around should have been automated. As part of those tools, they should be able to go backwards to take a random picture and determine which account it was published to. These tools are easy to make and the algorithms are widely known and used both by the media industry, by random corporations, and by governments. Since sites like this one are public, they could easily use a script to scan all new uploads and automatically ban any identified leakers. No human interaction needed. Getting around image resizing is trivial, especially when automated.

It's a little more work to go from a merged file with distorted watermarks to find all the leakers that made up that image, but it is possible. Even if your tools aren't advanced enough to find everyone the first time, it's normally easy to narrow it down on the next releases.

There are plenty of porn artists out there. Go support the ones which don't view you as criminal scum. Your dick will work just fine on their images.

couldn't an anon who is subscribed just get them from his discord?

>>58019
bruh you think i really wanna join a discord server?

>>57951
>Artist A can't do it so Artist B can't do it either!
Way to dodge the question.
>you literally can't come up with any reason why the parts of images would move between different user accounts
The trolling theory covers that.
>I literally just explained this works in exhaustive details
>muh differences
>Compare two images against each other = eyeballing it, retard.
If the artist needs to zoom in to catch the differences, then chances to the canvas size would necessarily throw the artist off thanks to the then defective reference. Besides, the artist still need some way to keep track of all the differences and to which user a given variation is associated with. Simply eyeballing it doesn't give the artist that kind of info.
>Enough to prove a fuck of a lot more than you can refute
Two users worth of images isn't enough for anything.
>I see something that looks like a duck, smells like a duck, meets the definition of a duck, is taxonomically identified as a duck, and tastes like a fucking duck, I'm going to say it's a goddamn duck.
What both explanations have in common is the existence of multiple variations of the same image, and some way to serve them. You just can't accept the idea of being trolled. or else you'd have already given us a very basic proposal of an algorithm that would make this work.

>>57955
>Honestly, I've so exhaustively refuted every single retarded thing you've come up with I'm not even going to bother replying to your inane, retarded ideas any more.
You must tire easy if you honestly think you "refutation" was exhaustive instead of being merely repetitive. Didn't you say something like that already?
>They're using layer stenography
All you have is, >>57725
>Concrete evidence that there's been layer manipulation, and that's it. Continuing to obsess about these differences doesn't solve the problems that would be solved with an actual proof of concept (which you're trying oddly hard to avoid producing).

>>57938
>every time he comes in here spewing his shilling I'm going to explain it in the most simple, retard-friendly ways possible
Found the troll.

>>57955
>You're not going to convince any rational people otherwise, Primeleap.
This wouldn't be the first time we've discussed potential DRM meant solely to throw us off.

>>57978
>These tools are easy to make and the algorithms are widely known and used both by the media industry, by random corporations, and by governments.
I think it's safe to assume they have interests and resources that the artists we're concerned with don't, but do you have any examples of these algorithms?

3nn4o1.jpg (44.7KiB, 500x506) save_alt

>>58058
>Dis nigga seems to think the algorithm that we have clear evidence of, in action, is too difficult for artists to create and yet won't accept that it's being used unless randos on the internet can come up with a working algorithm that would make it work

You're a real dumb cunt, you know that? Like I'm going to sit here and spend the hours required to come up with a legitimate fucking algorithm just so your stupid, ignorant, prime-leap shilling, willfully retarded ass would say 'oh yeah the thing we have clear evidence of being used is actually used'.

Here's an idea!

Go fuck yourself, Primeleap. Nobody is being convinced by your weaksauce attempts at gaslighting.

Y'all retarded if you think anyone here is actually from the site.

Stop bickering.

https://yiff.party/patreon/105255#primeleap_posts

>>58158
Looks like we got him bois.
But is this a one time thing? And we have to wait a whole year for another leak like Blitz? That'll be kinda weak tbh.

>>58076
>You're a real dumb cunt, you know that?

Not an argument, but >>58158 makes this a non-issue. Doesn't change the large leap you made from mere differences.

>>58205
Well considering you ignore all arguments and outright evidence shown to you, we're no longer having an argument. You don't argue with anti-vaccers. You present them the facts and if they're too fucking stupid to get it through their thick skulls, you move on.

Speaking of: Kbye.

>>58223
>Well considering you ignore all arguments
>dat projection

>and outright evidence shown to you
>>58058
>All you have is, >>57725
>>Concrete evidence that there's been layer manipulation
If you had simply said you _suspect_ that these differences are DRM, we'd have had less to talk about, but have fun replacing arguments with insults.

>Speaking of: Kbye.
>>57955
>I'm not even going to bother replying to your inane, retarded ideas any more.
?

538.jpg (94.6KiB, 421x834) save_alt

>>58340

>>58340
Well said.

>>58347
>>58223
>Speaking of: Kbye.
?

C-658VsXoAo3ovC.jpg (22.0KiB, 499x238) save_alt

>>58461
>>58477
>Random user comes in to sage a thread that is two pages deep on the forum list just to say 'well said' in response to a post that posits an argument that was already exhaustively countered and only makes any kind of sense if you sincerely think primeleap would spend more effort on 'trolling', than it would on creating an actual DRM system that moves elements of the image around.

Nigga you're not even good at samefagging.

And for the last time, all I have is 'moving parts of the image' and 'muh differences' except I have about forty pages of 'muh differences' and all you have is literally you saying 'but the differences don't actually mean anything' except even a trained monkey could see why they mean something. So every time you say 'that's all you have' you're essentially saying 'all you have is absolute concrete evidence of systematic, unique movement of image elements on every single leaked image since page 142 including six images leaks from multiple sources that are unique to eachother and THAT DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING!'

Fucking. Kek.

>>58158
holy based

>>58483
Riiiiiiight, because it's totally impossible for anyone else apart from the guy you're arguing with to have a different viewpoint than you.
What a smart man you are.

>>58483
>>58477
?

Source code for DRM design please. And remember: All DRMs can be broken one way or another.

>>58740
>Source code for DRM design please

I'd be satisfied with just pseudocode that roughly illustrates the concept.

>>58756
The 'Blitzdrachins site' thread has a decent amount of image examples of all the different flavors of DRM used over the years. Not pseudo-code or anything, but it goes a long way to understanding how exactly they're implementing it.

>>58768
>The 'Blitzdrachins site' thread has a decent amount of image examples of all the different flavors of DRM used over the years

Yeah, plenty of watermarks were uncovered in that thread. What of it?

>>58870
You're sure as hell never going to get anything remotely looking like code out of anyone in the know willingly, as it kinda defeats the purpose of having DRM if you just let out how it works so someone can crack it, they don't even let any random artist have at the 'real' DRM settings (but they'll certainly take your money for a shittier version of it) unless you're in their circle of friends and deemed trustworthy enough to have it. The best you're gonna get is seeing the end result and trying to work it backwards that way.

>>58878
>You're sure as hell never going to get anything remotely looking like code out of anyone in the know willingly, as it kinda defeats the purpose of having DRM if you just let out how it works so someone can crack it
>>58756

>>58973
psuedocode in what? Java? C++? Binary? Unity? Photoshop? HTML? Python? Flash? Do you even understand what you're asking for? 'oh I just want algorithm pseudocode!'. What if they use their own proprietary program to do it? What if they licensed a third party program to do it? What the fuck are you even asking for?

>>59007
>psuedocode in what? Java? C++? Binary? Unity? Photoshop? HTML? Python? Flash?
As long as a basic idea can be expressed, it doesn't really matter what language it's in, does it?

>What if they use their own proprietary program to do it? What if they licensed a third party program to do it?
What if I'm not asking for their source code? Someone here has strong enough ideas of their processes to express his ideas as absolute fact, so a mere example shouldn't be a problem.

>>59007
>>58640

>>59070
Oh lol so we're back this bullshit idea of 'we have concrete evidence of it happening in every single image for 30+ pages but I'm going to refuse to believe it unless someone can make up code that can do it!!!'

Like, seriously?

>>58158
What a waste, i'm sure that you could have used that account on some other artist instead of dacad.

>>59114
>muh differences
>>58640

>>59189
>>58483

>>59229
>>58614
>>58640

File