you’re right dude, the snowflake has all the agency here. not the storm that created it, nor the wind that blows it around. if only it would melt itself then the energy consumed by phase transition would cool the earth in an imperceptibly small way, bringing us that much further away from global warming catastrophe. really, it’s the snowflakes’ fault for selfishly getting frozen in the first place.

If you think paper straws and electric cars are going to save the environment you’re part of the fucking problem. It’s not enough, and it was never going to be. They knew it wouldn’t be when they came up with these things which is why these are the measures that are allowed to be taken. Laws and subsidies that would actually help are instead lobbied out of viability. So we’re left with electric car subsidies making Elon Musk the richest asshole in history and paper straws making everyone hate environmentalism while we still hurtle toward annihilation.

They literally conspired to make the entire country not only dependent on their products, but did so knowing the harm those products caused to both the people and environment. The majority of the blame rests there and pretending that any amount of “personal responsibility” needs to be addressed is just so fucking stupid and self-defeating that it practically borders on sabotage. Let’s get mired in blaming each other for our own minuscule, largely involuntary contribution while they keep filling their pockets with our blood.

Lick those oil exec boots just a little harder and I’m sure they’ll send you an invite to the pedo party.

AI to a layman just means “LLMs and Generative AI that rich assholes keep trying to force me to use or consume the output of”. i dont think its worthwhile to split semantic hairs over this. call the “good” stuff CNNs or machine learning if you really feel the need to draw a distinction.

Pretty on the nose that the Israeli spyware company named their spyware after what we call people who sexually assault children.

Unless you’re based in or have some kind of presence in those countries there’s no reason to even ban them. Banning by geolocation isn’t exactly trivial or reliable. Let them figure out a way to ban you instead.

I didn’t think you were making the post to defend Bitwarden or something. I was just adding the details of one of the exploits the paper found that directly contradicted their claim.

BW06: Icon URL Item Decryption. Items can include a URL field, which is used to autofill the credentials and display an icon on the client. The client decrypts the URL and fetches the icon from the server, including in its request the domain and top-level domain of the URL. For instance, if the URL is “https://host.tld/path”, the client request includes “host.tld”. This means that the adversary can learn (part of) the con- tents of URL fields. Using Attack BW05, an adversary can place the ciphertext of sensitive item fields, such as a user- name or a password, in the encrypted URL field. After fetch- ing the item, the client will then decrypt the ciphertext, confus- ing it for a URL. If the plaintext satisfies some conditions (i.e. containing a ‘.’ and no !), it will be leaked to the adversary. A URL checksum feature was deployed in July 2024, mak- ing the clients store a hash of the URL in another encrypted item field, therefore providing a rudimentary integrity check and preventing this attack. Note that old items are never up- dated to add such a checksum: this feature only protects items created after its introduction. Furthermore, URL checksums are only checked if a per-item key is present for the item. As we will see, an adversary can prevent per-item keys from being enabled with Attack BW10.

IMPACT. The adversary can recover selected target ciphertexts in the item, such as the username or the password.

REQUIREMENTS. The user opens a vault containing items that do not use per-item keys (i.e., items created before July 2024, or after Attack BW10 is run). The target plaintext must satisfy some additional conditions, detailed in Appendix

– from the paper the article is discussing

So you could potentially expose your passwords to a compromised server or some kind of MITM. If they meet the conditions for the validation check, anyway.

Every single criticism in this post could be equally leveled against windows and its users. Especially the part about servers not being updated. Your second paragraph is also a classic example of survivorship bias.

If your one drive folder reaches the cap it will stop you from saving files to one drive (which MS sets as a default location). Then it will ask you to pay. There is a possibility at this point that it will wipe your data if you disable One Drive before backing up your files to a non One Drive folder.

It won’t brick your computer, it’s just really pushy marketing with a chance of wiping some data.

I thought the stripes were actually camouflage and they’re just monochromatic because the things they’re hiding from have poor color vision.

You don’t need to apologize. It’s a good game worth recommending as long as you don’t pay that guy for it.

They’re just doing meow sounds for the cats. It’s not even worth the controversy he caused by doing it. Could have literally recorded himself meowing as he suggested and no one would have known or cared.

The only reason I even checked out a game named “Mewgenics” was because it was Edmund. I put up with his (literal) shit in Isaac because both it and this game are very well designed from a gameplay perspective. Not gonna reward putting murderers, rapists, and genocidal zionists in a game about doing cat eugenics though.

humor of a twelve year old with the morals of a south park character.

I’d pirate Mewgenics if you’re interested in it. Dipshit edgelord author used Ethan Klein and Chris Chan for VO work in the game, then justified it with some lame centrist fence sitting. Incredibly tone-deaf response for a game literally named after eugenics, so fuck him.

Letting them win because you’ve conceded before even playing is also a losing formula. Even if they don’t get awarded monetary damages they can probably at least get their legal expenses covered.

Libel. Taking it down doesn’t undo the damage to reputation which libel is concerned with. They might not get any monetary damages awarded but could maybe force Ars to put out a retraction.

oh this has to be the old method of embedding custom fonts into webpages.