selectively

It wasn't written for the HN crowd. Someone who is a 'tech person' and uses macOS would know what SuperDuper is.

We're just throwing straight up piracy on HN now? We're vibing piracy now? Felonies via API?

Escobar likely did less societal harm than Zuck.

Very unethical behavior combined by very bad security posture from the vendor. Bad.

Obnoxious author. Refusing to 'pay twice' for a game they care enough about to go through all this trouble + deeply obnoxious bit about Windows 11 at the end of of the post.

Generated by AI + no one cares about AGPL license compliance (and they aren't violating the AGPL anyway - your AI model is confusing the AGPL for actual GPL).

Gruber is a monstrous person. He's also written many different pieces that are more or less content-free anti-Korean racist screeds. The world would be much better if he'd retire and never speak in public again.

Because they are making poor choices. But even gambling is not equal to physical compulsion.

Yes, no. Yes, they want to make money. No, addiction is physical compulsion and nothing else. Despite the effort to redefine that term to cover all kinds of things, an app is not equal to heroin.

That's a study. I can link you studies that say violent video games cause aggression, that porn causes rape, etc. Studies are products of the biases of the researchers.

You were able to use it. Nothing lasts forever. People need help with a world that is hell, not video game related problems.

I do not believe 'AI psychosis' is an actual thing.

Can't say I support this. Legislative bodies should be dealing with actual problems in the world that meaningfully make the lives of regular people worse, not gamer entitlement.

Lunatic, likely AI generated comments here.

This is an app for deliberately causing pollution. The users of that app should be criminally prosecuted and lose their license/spend a few months in prison. The price differential between this device/app and a generic ODB dongle you can buy on Amazon for ~$10 is entirely made up by the criminal features EZ Lynk offers.

The app being software versus hardware doesn't change the legal or moral situation involving it. Much like the DOJ would demand identities of people importing PlayStation 1 modchips back in the 90s, the users of this equally criminal application will be provided to the DOJ.

PR work for Apple

Markdown is a Gruber thing.

No, I don't. I don't want anything that has to do with John Gruber, ever.

No.

This is an outrageously dumb thing to say. BIg Tobacco knowingly sold a product that physically addicted (the only real form of addiction) its users and killed them.

Facebook is not that.

Just went dark.

Are you claiming that if I sell 0day through a broker to the national Government of a given jurisdictions that the national Government of that jurisdiction is going to criminally penalize me?

If so, that's a bit naive. In the actual world, that buyer wants to buy more stuff from me, not penalize me.

Harder and harder to get good policy like what you describe when tech-adjacent people loudly argue for criminal penalties for anything other than coordinated disclosure :(

(The buyers are the NSA, the IDF, Cellebrite, NSO and its successor corporation and that kind of thing. Depends on what you are offering)

You'll learn who the buyers are if you routinely have the really good stuff to sell! If you are offering iOS zero click on a semi-regular basis, the buyer is going to want to try to deal with you directly and preferably offer you a more regular form of employment, if you are interested. Some national governments may offer certain benefits to you, depending on your situation.

All depends on what you have to offer. If you were able to offer this https://arstechnica.com/security/2025/09/microsofts-entra-id... or something of that magnitude, a lot of problems in your life would just go away. The buyers would all be Five Eyes and the intelligence gain of having that kind of access even briefly is priceless.

In a more Western-centric context, imagine if you had a flaw like that, same 'no logs are generated' and 'every single customer account is accessible' but the impacted vendor was Alibaba Cloud. The researcher would get to name their price. That's the real world, that's the world we share. We shouldn't be blind to that.

There are two options:

1. Status quo. Researchers are free to disclose to a vendor, free to sell vulns to legitimate companies, free to do full disclosure if they want. This situation benefits security. Researchers are able to pay their bills while also doing meaningful research into OSS projects that are unable to fund the kind of security audit they need. Harm reduction, of sorts.

2. Everyone is a bad actor. No one is going to do this work for free/for a bounty. Horrible flaws will be found and shared with ransomware gangs and the like. 0day will sell for a percentage of the ransom winnings. Researchers will live like kings, everyone else will suffer.

Which do you prefer?

No, there are users who want those to be norms. Qualified researchers happily sell substantive vulns to people who pay (Governments/Cellebrite and companies like that) enough to quell any complaint.

Those norms do not exist. Those are people asking companies to do stuff to benefit the person complaining for free, and many companies will not do that.

Who cares about how you are seen when you are selling 0day for big bucks? The bad actor makes more money than the 'legitimate' one without breaking any law. Punishing someone who didn't alert distros despite a patch being available encourages the company to simply find flaws and sell them for profit - it pays more to begin with.

Many users abuse subscriptions in violation of the TOS to run tools like OpenClaw is automated ways. It's an anti-abuse measure. Makes perfect sense. Anthropic's business model is the API business. The $200 subs are a paid demo of the API. Go slam the API with OpenClaw all you want, if you can afford it.

Researchers are under no obligation to engage in coordinated disclosure and are free to sell 0day for profit. Just fyi. Be glad it was disclosed at all. Be glad a patch was available prior to release.

Those people would be subjected to permanent, identity-bound bans.