Trump said they tried this by routing them weapons through the Kurds and the Kurds just kept the weapons.

It would help if anyone just posting obvious lies like they’re jokes had a sense of humor instead, yes. “Just a prank, bro!” as a holiday sucks.

That’s not enabled by default afaik and it burns through way more tokens looping its output through several times. It also adds a bunch more context which will bring you that much closer to context collapse.

If it gets manually reviewed it’ll only be because this dogpile happened. Lots of people get banned like this with no recourse because they aren’t Paul McCartney

Are you actively ignoring the similarities between these instances or do you genuinely not understand that they’re both examples of strange and excessive moderation?

Whatever the fuck it is it doesn’t need to know how old I am to do its job.

An init system does not need to know my personal details; it’s for starting programs in a specific order just fuck off with this shit. You don’t even have to capitulate to this stuff and these freaks are out here doing it preemptively like they expect a fucking pat on the head for being first in line to dive tongue first on to that boot.

I think tying “big” to “car-based” and “small” to “walkable” is probably skewing the results a bit. I doubt most people would choose “small” regardless of what follows it.

it’s the main way for software to verify the identity of a source. without it you let nefarious actors do something like hijack a DNS server and impersonate your servers to your users, which is a pretty big problem if you’re running a software distribution network! it is literally a breach of trust and massive security vulnerability. and it probably broke a ton of shit when software that uses the certificate found an expired one and suddenly (and correctly) refused to work.

SBF wasn’t doing securities fraud with only crypto, if that’s what you’re thinking of. Also it was a pyramid scheme and not a pump and dump.

Normal money can get you a visit from the SEC when you do securities fraud with it. Has that ever happened with a crypto pump and dump?

This is also why people who complain about how “our tax dollars” are spent are missing the point. Their tax dollars don’t fund the government or any of its activities. Taxes are just an inflationary control measure; money is created when the government spends it.

I mean it’s also really really good at money laundering and other financial securities scams that are otherwise illegal in real currency. IDK why OP is being so dismissive of that.

As long as the gov refuses to regulate it, it’s going to be useful for crimes. On the off chance we ever get a government willing to actually do anything but war crimes and graft, regulating it would destroy a lot of its utility and value.

You can just say you did that without having to pay the money, the only thing you’d be missing is a website (that probably won’t be around much longer) confirming you did that. That’s kinda why NFTs didn’t work.

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.

Letting them win because you’ve canceled 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.