BLKNSLVR

Chinese priority: infiltrate the polycule!

This US Government investigating Jensen Huang will be an exercise in cotton balls and kid gloves.

Trump himself relaxed laws on chip exports to China.

P.S. If you have any other liquidity available, maybe 'buy the dip'?

I agree with the first part, inasmuch as volatility in one's personal life affects one's professional conduct and ability. The two cannot be entirely separated, but there are definitely varying scales of inter-connectivity.

Common sense and judgement fluctuate. Humans, you know, we're prone to entirely unpredictable moments of emotional weakness. Maybe we're hungry, maybe we're tired, maybe the missus or the kids have been sick, maybe we just don't want to face leg-day after 12-hours of strategising. As per the attack and defense argument: A defender only needs to be wrong once.

If the AI boom takes a massive nosedive because someone couldn't keep their dick in their pants, then there was no substance behind the boom. There might be some speculative volatility as a result of this sideshow, but if this is the pin that pops the bubble, then it was still a bubble.

AI will be fine.

It's an interesting argument. The fact this article exists is somewhat proof that it is a differentiator. The flipside, however, is that spammers very specifically require their emails to get to add many mailboxes as possible, so their motivation is greater to make their emails service compatible.

Company sys admins have likely got all sorts of other issues to worry about, and the occasional report of an email not getting through is likely low on their to-investigate list.

Having said that, I self host a mail server, and have all those things setup correctly, and my workplace uses Outlook, and I've not had issues with delivery, so it's not a particularly difficult bar to jump.

Screamer 2, I had a copy of that, wow that brings back partial fragments of memories. That's going back a ways. I think I spent a fair bit of time in that one.

I agree, but I was more pointing out Nissan because they were relatively early with the Leaf which, I thought, was pretty successful.

So it's going to be full of advertising and will sell user days as the primary two ways it will be profitable?

I mean, that does sound very much like the future of our current timeline, unfortunately.

It's a shame Nissan didn't lean harder into EVs since the Leaf is a great little car, and they were releasing them since 2012.

Isn't that just where you can find a whole lot of Linux ISOs?

I do think ISPs should take a more active role is filtering DNS for their Customers, by default, but opt-out-able, against known-bad domains, or partner with public DNS providers for said service, and include options for blocking additional specific topics (ads, adult sites, gambling, social media, the usual suspects). It could be a value-add differentiator.

It should only be done as a Customer Service, however, and disclosed in a normal sized font and, as I said above, opt-out-able.

I would also extend this to say that ISPs should do the same for known-bad ASNs, and network ranges. Following on from yesterday's discussion about (p)residential proxies, blocking access to known C&C server domains and addresses at an ISP level would be a great solution.

I am, of course, looking at this through a utopian lens where ISPs aren't in bed with big tech and data brokers and other sketchy industries where profit can be made from selling out your customers' data. A 'real' ISP, you know, like 'no true scotsman'. It's all a question of trust and responsibility.

I pretty severely 'mess' with DNS on my home network and, damn, it makes using the Internet a much nicer experience. In fact, it makes using the Internet tolerable, where otherwise it is decidedly not. It could be classified as 'insecure' to not mess with DNS on any network[0].

[0]: https://www.pcmag.com/news/fbi-recommends-installing-an-ad-b...

> I live stream for a living, and my partner does social media

I'm old. I don't understand how the economics of this work, and I think of it was explained to me, it would annoy me.

"Legal". The law is truly an ass.

Thankfully security researchers exist to fill the gaps that lawmakers haven't gotten to / won't get to: https://blog.includesecurity.com/2026/06/the-smart-tv-in-you...

These are the specific URLs mentioned:

  proxyjs.brdtnet.com
  proxyjs.luminatinet.com
  proxyjs.bright-sdk.com
  clientsdk.bright-sdk.com
  clientsdk.brdtnet.com

I use these regular expressions to block any connections to the domains or subdomains:

  /(\.|^)brdtnet\.com$/
  /(\.|^)luminatinet\.com$/
  /(\.|^)bright-sdk\.com$/
  /(\.|^)luminati\.io$/

No idea if this actually prevents proxy functionality altogether, but prevents some phoning home if you're infected.

In my head this is Joe Pesci saying "the money is now laundered" in Lethal Weapon 2.

Are they actual MAGA or are they just MAGA-intimidated?

Once the bully has been punched in the face once, they seem a little bit less scary, so hopefully the judicial system has been mostly MAGA-intimidated, so that there's hope for a sooner-rather-than-later return to sanity.

On-going discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50371246

A list of proxy lists: https://proxy-scraper.de/sources/

The lists generated by this tool can be useful as well: https://github.com/maximilianfeix/proxy-scraper (which point to here: https://github.com/maximilianfeix/free-proxy-list)

There is also this bot proxy IP list: https://github.com/antoinevastel/avastel-bot-ips-lists

Pure speculation, I don't have any concrete answers. I'm fairly scorched-earth with my blocking, but I'm only protecting personal environments, so no one other than scatter-gun-everything AI-scraper-bots would even bother.

I'd be very interested in AI capabilities in detecting anomalous activity given that it should be very effective at pattern matching across large data sets. What would be required, however, is significant training with industry/application specific 'normal' browsing traffic patterns to determine acceptable tolerances, and then design escalating deterrence if and when tolerances are breached.

How is the scraper process stepping through the site? It must be programmatic, even if it's programmed to be random. What does that look like in traffic data in terms of timing and content requests?

What hazards can be put in place that a normal user would never go near, but a scraper is likely to trip over?

If scraping is being performed from multiple locations in parallel, what might that look like? ie. joining multiple sessions together that may show a more 'scraper' kind of behaviour.

Under IPv6 wouldn't detection start burning a lot of addresses? Yes, the pool is large, but that just means it's a scaling issue from IPv4 to IPv6, rather than a new problem requiring new thinking to solve? (assuming ways of detection were successful).

I'm being somewhat devil's advocate in my blocking rhetoric. The internet is in a weird confluence of wild-west and surveillance state. I like that there are ways and means of being anon-/pseudon-ymous; I like a bit of anarchaos, that's where the spirit of hacking lives. But I also don't want it sticking to my boots when I walk in the house. I'm also not fundamentally against scraping; there's definitely good scraping. There is an irony, though, in protecting scraped data or services that are built on scraped data (and I'm not accusing you, personally, just my general logical ideology of scraping). On residential proxies, I think they're 99% run by erstwhile criminals leveraging what were, until recently, referred to as botnets into a service they can launder their botnets through as 'I am legitimate business man'. I think most, basically all, residential proxies are run involuntarily or unwittingly and that blocking them would provide a greater society benefit than it would a drawback. Anything that promotes the sanitisation of end user devices can only be a good thing. The whole ecosystem is in a terrible state and regulation doesn't even seem to be on the distant horizon.

Maybe I'm hypocritical, or I'm trying to maintain mutually exclusive positions. This is where I'm at though.

... and then Donald Trump as President, Stephen Miller as, whatever he is, and Peter Hegseth as Defense Secretary (he did serve in the military, if that's worth anything).

I'd still find a way to block your scrapers.

I like to be unipartisan (or is it panpartisan?), all politicians do bad things.

Those proxies are paid for in rubles, not dollars.

You certainly can ban that IP.

It should be a balancing act though, somewhere between what you said and my first sentence.

Rate limiting, or additional layers of input sanitisation for IP addresses known to have been malicious in the past.

It's unfortunate that good users will have to endure some difficulties because of bad users on the same network, but if security is the priority, then measures must be taken, you shouldn't just leave to door open to potentially known bad users / traffic.

IPv4 is a shared resource, but some ranges have worse reputations than others, and all are owned by organisations that have the ability to monitor and filter for malicious traffic. It gets into a fraught discussion about censorship, but it is possible for network owners to monitor for, and block / restrict traffic detected as 'bad'. It's just a matter of cost and scale, and those that put the effort in should have their users rewarded with fewer 'trust-issues' roadblocks.

Let the damage mitigation begin. Then from 2030, there's about a generation worth of damage to start repairing.

Just ignore the sign saying "Beware of the leopard".

8 sucked enough to drive me to Linux.

(I think it was actually 10, but 8 really started the lean away)

Some domains listed in the article to add to block lists for those who own Xiaomi TVs.

  tracking.miui.com
  pb-m.sp.gitv.tv
  file.market.xiaomi.com
  video.market.xiaomi.com
  appstore.cdn.pandora.xiaomi.com
  *.cdn.pandora.xiaomi.com
  package.box.xiaomi.com
  app.znds.com
  data.mistat.xiaomi.com
  tracker.xiaomixiaoai.com
  access.speech.xiaomixiaoai.com
  grayconfig.xiaomixiaoai.com
  resolver.mi.xiaomi.com
  broker.mqtt.pandora.xiaomi.com
  milink.pandora.xiaomi.com
  upgrade.ptmi.gitv.tv
  gstat.ptmi.gitv.tv
  openapi.shafa.com

Thank you. Probably because of the copy and paste of an AI answer, which is somewhat understandable in most cases.

I hope you get it to work. I tried re-mapping some of the custom buttons on the remote, but it didn't seem to work consistently, and right/left arrowing to navigate the app list isn't much of an impost, so I haven't really tried to troubleshoot it.

If I was a bit more brave with my TV (family members would not be happy with a bricked TV), I'd give this a go: https://github.com/seun-novodev/android-tv-debloat-toolkit

P.S. These are the Smart TV Blocklists I use:

  https://perflyst.github.io/PiHoleBlocklist/SmartTV.txt
  https://raw.githubusercontent.com/hkamran80/blocklists/refs/heads/main/smart-tv.txt
  https://blocklistproject.github.io/Lists/smart-tv.txt

Plus this list of regular expressions specific to TCL domains:

  /(\.|^)leiniao\.com$/
  /(\.|^)tclking\.com$/
  /(\.|^)tcllauncher\.com$/
  /(\.|^)my7v\.com$/
  /(\.|^)huan\.tv$/

I was wondering why you were no longer CTO, congrats on the board role (seems that it's been a bit over 18 months).

I don't know you from a grain of salt, but you've seemed to be pretty open and honest on HN about some of the inner workings (technically and politically) of Cloudflare, which is appreciated.

Yes, Google Android TV software.

I can't remember the exact site that had the instructions that I followed, but Brave Search AI provided the answer below, which fits my memory.

Key point: Install the replacement Launcher first, otherwise Android will run without a launcher, ie. without an interface, which is a bit... non-ideal. This happened to me at least once (because I can be impatient), but if i recall correctly, I could still get to an adb prompt to re-enable the default launcher, reboot the TV, then try again. Also, please look up some alternative references just to make sure; I don't want to be solely responsible for any potential bricking...

  To replace the default launcher on a TCL TV using ADB, you must first install a third-party launcher (such as Projectivy Launcher or FLauncher) and then disable the stock Google TV launcher packages via command line.

  1. Enable Developer Options and ADB
  Navigate to Settings > System > About and click Android TV OS Build or Build Number seven times to unlock Developer Options.
  Then, go to Settings > System > Developer Options and enable USB Debugging (and Network Debugging if using wireless ADB).

  2. Connect via ADB
  Connect your computer to the TV's IP address using the terminal:

  # adb connect <TV_IP_ADDRESS>

  3. Disable Stock Launcher and Setup Wizard
  Run the following commands to disable the default Google TV launcher and the setup wizard (which often reverts changes on reboot):

  # adb shell pm disable-user --user 0 com.google.android.apps.tv.launcherx
  # adb shell pm disable-user --user 0 com.google.android.tungsten.setupwraith

  Note: On some newer TCL models running Android 14, you may need to temporarily disable the package installer (com.android.packageinstaller) to sideload APKs, or manually select the new launcher via the Home button prompt after disabling the stock launcher.

  4. (Optional, to revert the above changes) Restore Stock Launcher:

  # adb shell pm enable com.google.android.apps.tv.launcherx
  # adb shell pm enable com.google.android.tungsten.setupwraith

Other resources:

https://android.gadgethacks.com/how-to/best-google-tv-launch...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAKno02w7J0