Roblox didn’t just “make it easy”, it’s their entire business model, which is the problem. Watch the videos. The discussion isn’t about how much of a percentage Roblox takes, it’s about how kids basically get pressured to work in digital sweatshops to create the content which is what Roblox sells.

It’s child exploitation for profit:

investigation: How Roblox is Exploiting Young Game Developers

Roblox Pressured Us to Delete Our Video. So We Dug Deeper.

No one should patronize Roblox. They exploit child labor for profit:

investigation: How Roblox is Exploiting Young Game Developers

Roblox Pressured Us to Delete Our Video. So We Dug Deeper.

When you hear “Roblox” you should think “child exploitation”.

Because if it’s doing this it’s a malicious app….

OK, how would you know?

Google also said they’ve found zero apps doing this.

So what? There are millions of apps on the Play store, they aren’t all being reviewed with this level of scrutiny. This means basically nothing.

This article doesn’t really address that. I don’t think there’s any indication that this particular vulnerability is related to nation-state hacking.

I’m sure there are apps that have malware built in yes, but I mean the MITM approach during an app download that you were describing.

Hmm, yes that can happen, but can it happen if you’re downloading directly from the Play store?

Um, ok, and how would you know the difference?

The present reliability issues come from the ubiquity of WiFi networks, especially residential. If you live in an apartment building you’re surrounded by them, and they’re all trying to use the same limited radio bands. It wasn’t such an issue when the first WiFi standards were designed.

802.11bn is trying to implement some better interference-dodging and de-conflicting, but it requires changes at the hardware level. Without reading the full spec, my guess is that the WiFi device has to do more active listening to other networks in the area and adjust its own transmissions to work around them - maybe even talk to other devices at the protocol level and do some traffic policing (e.g. you go then I go then you go then I go…) to reduce interference.

A literal decimation.

Normally I would agree with this perspective, but in this case the “malicious app” is just a demo. It requires no permissions to do the malicious behavior, which means that the relevant code could be included in any app and wouldn’t trigger a user approval, a permissions request or a security alert. This could be hiding in anything that you install.

Look I’m ready to see people come to their senses about this “AI” crap, but the answer is no.

Actually this is covered by IEEE 802.11bn, though it’s not actually finalized yet:

IEEE 802.11bn, dubbed Ultra High Reliability (UHR), is an upcoming IEEE 802.11 wireless networking standard. It is also designated Wi-Fi 8 by the Wi-Fi Alliance. As its designation suggests, 802.11bn aims to improve the reliability of wireless communications rather than primarily increasing data rates. The standard is projected to be finalized in September 2028.

This isn’t really what “normalizing” means… no one is “turning to commercials for life advice”. OP is talking about commercials projecting an unhealthy impression of what normal looks like.

You must be using the wrong repositories… try enabling apt --please-dont-track-me-fbi

But a proper package manager is better, and we already had that.

There is a crow pulling both wolves by the tail called “bedrock linux” that can install packages using both apt and aur.

Oh god… what happens when they both try to pull the same library as a dependency, but slightly different versions because different repos?

Sure, you would have deploy a malware application

Like an application for customizing the RGB on your super cool gamer mouse?

0118999…