Sir, this is a Wendy’s

Might be an AI Bot?!

Just waiting for the definitive edition to release 🤞

Props for putting your question in a comment and not the post body!

The only thing that I can think of right now would be a handheld 3D-Scanner. But I’m not even sure what kind of software would be needed to capture/use the information.

You know what would help? Steam releasing a console. Valve, please just do what you did with the Steam Deck and put it in a box, offer 2-3 variations of specs and refresh them every 3-5 years.

deleted by creator

I’m doing the best I can myself despite my disillusionment. And I appreciate everyone who does the same. I wish humanity would unite in facing this threat, but I’m not holding my breath.

in case all efforts to stop climate change fail.

Are these efforts in the room with us right now?

Why is this commentworthy?

Yes, you need internet to use the “smart” features of the TV. No, you don’t need internet to just use the TV. You can connect any device that is supported by the ports on the TV, for example a Raspberry PI with a DOS emulator or for example an Apple TV to replace the “smart” part of the TV.

I appreciate your reply and understand your perspective. I still don’t fully agree, it might be a matter of the point of view from which you look at this issue. But I think in essence we are on the same page.

Thanks for not abandoning the discussion!

I’m genuinely curious what you would call this and what distinguishes it from a vulnerability.

Leaving aside responsibility, the system could have been set up in a way that wouldn’t have exposed user data but wasn’t. This is now fixed and user data isn’t exposed via this method any longer. What is the right word for what it was at the moment this flaw was discovered?

I’d argue that it is still a vulnerability in this scenario. But point taken, it’s always important to find the root cause and not just put blame on the person who stumbled into the trap.

It sounds like she’s very upset that Dansup made it explicit that he was fixing this issue, thinking that even exposing it in commit comments (which as we know get way more readership than blog posts) would mean people knew about it, and the less people that knew about it, the safer her partner’s information would be since she is continuing to do this apparently. You will not be surprised to discover that I think that type of thinking is also a mistake.

I agreed with you at first because from your description it sounded like she was saying security through obscurity was a good thing. But that’s not the case.

What she’s saying in the blog post is that this a 0-day and should be handled according to the best practices for 0-day disclosure.

You have to decide if you want to

• publish the findings before the fix -> more people will know and exploit the vulnerability but users might be aware and may or may not be able to mitigate sharing even more
• publish the findings after the fix -> the opposite

I don’t pretend to know enough to judge which option is the best. But I can’t fault the blog author for pointing out that Dansup didn’t follow best practices.

deleted by creator

The reflection of d would not make a B. The reflection of D would.

deleted by creator

So since Apple is probably not just throwing money away… what other reason could they have?

It’s still good marketing. People will associate a good service, with good/great shows/movies and without all the fluff that Netflix has, with a good company.

I loved it when it came out and watched it a few times back then. Every time I tried to watch it later on I got really bored and had to stop halfway through. I don’t remember why that’s the case though.

So I’m looking forward to a fresh take on it. Especially because I also loved District 9.