> Based on both assessment, I estimate the overall compromise period spanned from June through December 2, 2025, when all attacker access was definitively terminated.
FTA.
2,820 karma · joined July 2, 2013
FTA.
The problem here is requiring hardware-attested DRM: Widevine L1 on Edge on Windows, and Apple FairPlay on Safari on MacOS. The only way to get hardware attested DRM is via browser specific (i.e.: native code) support that interfaces with the OS & GPU drivers. You can't get there through an extension.
It appears to only be useful on Edge on Windows.
I understand it spoofs all of the checks it can, but the only Chromium browser that supports Widevine L1 (a requirement for 4K) is Edge, so even if all of the check spoofing works, it still won't do 4K.
There's even a table in the README that describes this exact scenario.
It doesn't work on Firefox. It appears not to work on Chrome. The suggestion is to use Edge, which on Windows already gets 4K support in Netflix anyway.
To go further into detail about the whole thing: "You're holding it wrong" is perfectly valid criticism in many, many different ways and fields. It's a strong criticism in some, and weak in others, but almost always the advice is still useful.
Anyone complaining about getting hurt by holding a knife by the blade, for example, is the strongest example of the advice being perfect. The tool is working as designed, cutting the thing with pressure on the blade, which happens to be their hand.
Left-handers using right-handed scissors provides a reasonable example: I know a bunch of left-handers who can cut properly with right-handed scissors and not with left-handed scissors. Me included, if I don't consciously adjust my behaviour. Why? Because they have been trained to hold scissors wrong (by positioning the hand to create opposite push/pull forces to natural), so that they can use the poor tool given to them. When you give them left-handed scissors and they try to use the same reversed push/pull, the scissors won't cut well because their blades are being separated. There is no good solution to this, and I sympathise with people stuck on either side of this gap. Still, learn to hold scissors differently.
And, of course, the weakest, and the case where the snark is deserved: if you're holding your iPhone 4 with the pad of your palm bridging the antenna, holding it differently still resolves your immediate problem. The phone should have been designed such that it didn't have this problem, but it does, and that sucks, and Apple is at fault here. (Although I personally think it was blown out of proportion, which is neither here nor there.)
In the case of LLMs, the language of the prompt is the primary interface -- if you want to learn to use the tool better, you need to learn to prompt it better. You need to learn how to hold it better. Someone who knows how to prompt it well, reading the kind of prompts the author used, is well within their rights to point out that the author is prompting it wrong, and anyone attempting to subvert that entire line of argument with a trite little four-sentence bit of snark in whatever the total opposite of intellectual curiosity is deserves the downvotes they get.
Prices for who? The prices that are being paid by the big movers in the AI space, for hardware, aren't sticker price and never were.
The example you use in your comment, RAM, won't work: It's not 3x the price for OpenAI, since they already bought it all.
Also, what big words? 'Proliferation'? 'Incoherent'? The whole article is written at a high school reading level. There's some embedded clauses in longer sentences, but we're not exactly slogging our way through Proust, here.
They wanted to push a feature, and they said they would if they didn't see any major regressions. Then they did see a major regression, so they pulled the feature.
Exact version numbers, timelines, and builds are pretty irrelevant to that process. Or are you actually saying you would prefer they had just left their product broken for a significant portion of users, just to keep aligned with the version numbers they mentioned in a blog post?
It isn't without its flaws: I wouldn't ever use the pre-installed version of Windows (the one that doesn't allow you to open services.msc or Task Manager), because I totally distrust it. The fact that the panel is natively 50hz portrait on an inherently landscape device is painful. The default hysteresis settings on the trackpad are awful, the RAM speed by default is stuck at 4000MT/s...
But after an hour or two of hacking Arch into an acceptable shape and solving all of those niggles, it does absolutely everything I need in a portable machine, and is small enough to fit in a tiny sling bag along with everything else I carry around on the daily. It "only" gets about 6 hours on battery, but that's the biggest downside. And 6 hours is plenty of time to cook.
With a full-screen terminal and a keyboard that is very acceptable for the 10" form-factor, I can hack on anything I want wherever I want. Niri as a WM is an absolute dream on this thing. I basically don't bother carrying around my personal M4 macbook pro anymore, and it has been relegated to sitting on a desk and never moving from home.
If you think acknowledging that fact (and the fact that there’s really not a great way to make LLMs more efficient) is “apologetics”, I cannot engage with you in good faith.
Regular modern applications use a lot of RAM as an incidental or accidental part of their operation. Even if you think the tasks that they're achieving are of extreme need, the RAM use is excessive.
These problems are apples and oranges. You can hate both, or one, or neither. I know plenty of people who are in each one of those camps.
1..100 | % {"$_ $(('fizz','')[$_%3])$(('buzz','')[$_%5])"}
I am not sure that using [$_%3] to index into a two-value array doesn't count as a "disguised boolean" thought.
Do people not know that each layer comes with its own downsides?
Do people just do 272 layers and think that it’s normal?
This seems like people discovering that water is wet and fire is hot.
Taste has nothing to do with your awareness of your preference, and cannot exist in a social vacuum.
Taste has everything to do with others opinions of your preference: If your preferences, on display, are enough to bring many others to agree that your preferences are similar to their preferences, you have good taste. If your preferences, when encountered, are enough to bring others preferences into alignment with yours, you have excellent taste. If you can recognise what is the new hotness before anyone else does, you have even better taste. You don't have to be able to justify it, you just have to know it.
You don't need to be aware of this to be happening. You can have incredible taste while just sitting around and doing your own thing.
You can have incredible taste in only red wine without ever tasting white. You can have good taste in only hip-hop and not jazz, or in impressionist art and not abstract expressionism, or any other number of things.
If I know that your recommendation for a category is going to be good, then I know you have good taste.
> Strabismus disrupts sensory fusion, the cortical process of combining the images from the two eyes into a single binocular image [3–6]. The main perceptual consequences of lack of fused binocular images is diplopia (double vision) and a lack of binocular depth perception.
Just because those with strabismus can use monocular cues to inform them of relative depth does not mean that they have the same level of depth perception as those with normal binocular convergence.
The best example of this is sports, but as another example I'm legally disallowed from driving an articulated vehicle -- for what I personally think is a pretty good reason. Anecdotally, compared to friends and family my depth perception is dogshit.
The Switch 2 and the Steam Deck are hugely different machines, despite sharing a form factor.
The monopoly that Apple controls is not Apple's goods, it's the control of the sale of goods of other vendors to consumers who have no comparable choice but to transact via Apple. The consumers are the people who would have to spend $1,000 to switch to a different market, and then have to re-purchase every good they'd purchased from the previous market.
It's not like Walmart, where the consumer can walk across the road to Target and buy the exact same thing at a similar price. Imagine if every time you wanted to switch which big-box store you shopped at they charged you a $500 entry fee and you had to re-buy all of your household electronics.
I would also, in a general sense, suggest that in the only obvious direct competitor market, Google does not exert monopoly power, because you can install F-Droid as an alternate marketplace. They are anti-competitive in other ways, though, to your earlier point.
You can disagree with whether or not that statement is a "real issue", in that you can buy a completely different phone and install apps provided by other vendors, but it doesn't take away any truthiness from the initial statement.
From my perspective, though, that monopoly is a real issue. Some 55% of the adult US population own an iPhone. A monopoly in a market made up of the majority of the US populace should be thoroughly examined.
I have one very silly question... Why is the elf logo not pixel art? :)
This is exactly what I do to visitors to my house.
Sous vide steak, as mentioned by your parent post, is similar.
Things that are currently underfunded could, with the availability of more funds, be less underfunded.
Obviously it's not just the nine billionaires that are "the problem", but inequality in general.
The other salient point is that all connections are established outbound through a broker, and importantly this is the case from both sides: The appliance at the terminating end of the tunnel establishes reverse tunnels to the broker for the connections, so it's never "exposed to the internet".
The broker can then push to your SIEM or whatever so you can have your SOC log jockeys harass your employees for accidentally leaving NordVPN on after watching international sports.
There are actual benefits: You can do things like allow logins to system A from anywhere, but system B only from your home country, you can do JIT network access requests, etc... but mostly it's vendor marketing to get you to spend too much money.
It feels entirely backwards to me that there is some kind of dull/exciting switch that flips and a person becomes dull or exciting, depending on whether the observer finds the topic the person is speaking about interesting. The one at fault (such that there is any) for the lack of interest isn't usually the speaker, surely?
I have a friend who works in a field that most people absolutely find completely uninteresting (and, to be frank, I am also uninterested in the field in general), but when we sit and have a pint after work and have a chat, I can't help but be engaged because there is more to learn about everything, and while the technical minutiae of his trade is unexciting, the conversation is not. I know more about turbidity now than I ever expected or needed to, but I don't feel like it was time wasted.
Swap me out for an analog of your wife, and the guy flips from interesting to dull? That seems unfair, for some reason, not that fairness should really ever into it. Just because an interest isn't shared doesn't mean it should be derided as dull, right?
And, y'know, conversely, I know a dull guy. Like, I like to think I'm a good conversationalist. I can hold my own in a chat with basically anyone. But this guy. He sink-holes literally anything you try to say. One word answers. You can drag out the most maniacal story of the past few years of your life, a story that every single person you've ever talked to about it has been engaged and you get a good back and forth and a bit of patter, but this guy: "Oh, cool". And he's like that with everyone. Play word association, you say salt, I say pepper, you say this guy's name, I say dull. All of this seems really mean, but I'm pretty sure he's happy being that guy. I mean who knows what his actual inner thoughts about the matter might be, because you'll never get him to say anything worth listening to about it.
And this, I think, is probably the crux of why I'm so not on board with the way you see it. My friend and my boring friend are not the same, vis-a-vis in a dullness competition. They're not even in the same weight class.
Anyway. Perspectives. Weird, huh?