well what you said after zir reply didn’t demonstrate any of that

that you write things i’m trying to understand the relevance of, like “This information wasn’t provided in the post.” and “the first comment points to btrfs”. The Reddit link you gave also points towards btrfs as well as very undetailed mentions of zfs. ze says “i’ve tried btrfs and it doesn’t work so i’m looking into zfs”, and you reply “use btrfs use btrfs or look into zfs”, a message whose helpfulness I struggle to understand.

the device I’m testing first is too small for btrfs

Another researcher, Davi Ottenheimer, pointed out that the security section (Section 3, pages 47-53) of Anthropic’s 244-page documentation “contains no count of zero-days at all. With no CVE list, no CVSS distribution, no severity bucket, no disclosure timeline, no vendor-confirmed-novel table, no false-positive rate.”

excerpts from the summary of the post linked in “Devanash ultimately concluded”, a lot of which Register repeats (which I think is a good thing since the copyediting makes the language a lot more accessible and wide-reaching and of course it was credited):

The bugs are real. 17-year-old FreeBSD RCE, 23-year-old Linux kernel heap overflow, 27-year-old OpenBSD TCP flaw. LLMs catch these because they can reason about the gap between what code does and what the developer intended. Fuzzers and static analysis literally cannot do this.

The coverage is wrong on almost every detail. The “181 Firefox exploits” ran with the browser sandbox ( yes, the thing that stops browser exploits) off. The FreeBSD exploit transcript shows substantial human guidance, not autonomy. The “thousands of severe vulnerabilities” extrapolates from 198 manually reviewed reports. The Linux kernel bug was found by Opus 4.6, the public model, not Mythos.

The moat is thinner than anyone reported. AISLE tested eight models including a 3.6B model at $0.11/M tokens. All eight found the FreeBSD bug. Mythos’s actual lead is in multi-step exploit development, not detection. That’s a narrower and more replicable advantage than what’s being sold.

Yandex is Russia’s Google, sold in 2024 to Russian oligarchs with close state ties, so I’d say it’s justified to criticize this particular sponsorship business

that infamous Ctrl+Alt+Del strip was drawn up for a reason

https://books.google.com/books?id=4Sg5sXyiBvkC&pg=PA438 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK532992/

It is estimated that as many as 26% of all pregnancies end in miscarriage and up to 10% of clinically recognized pregnancies.

some people would like to buy them

It’s not just about digital privacy. It never talks about data privacy. It’s about consumer protection and social media’s nature being harmful. The only European law violations mentioned are anti-scamming + “𝕏 refuses to make its public data available to researchers”. It’s also explicitly in favor of KOSA, which lets the FTC ban anything it wants from children’s eyes online. It’s quite implied that the article supports banning social media for youth.

Is comparing social media to a dangerous drug over the top? Not according to the U.S. Surgeon General’s office, which in 2023 released an advisory titled “Social Media and Youth Mental Health” (download it now before RFK Jr. suppresses it!), which summarized extensive evidence of mental health damage to children and adolescents who consume excessive amounts of social media.

Okay, that comparison’s still wayyyy over-the-top.

You are not insulated from the effects just because you don’t use it. If you use the internet, chances are you’ve read bot output.

the inclusion of nothing phone in the lineup makes me unsure what op is looking for so i just assumed they was looking for general phone recommendations lol

the xiaomi 17 pro is getting a lot of hype for its display on the back, and this is the company well known for emulating an apple feel quite well on android… and being Chinese

nothing phone: are you aware that the nothing phone 3 got rid of the glyph interface?

i’m surprised that the fediverse manifestation here has not recommended the fairphone yet

I’m sorry, who the heck made the PRC stars white‽

(The conversation continues… in https://kbin.melroy.org/m/[email protected]/t/1284060/Nintendo-s-Creature-Capture-Patent-Dealt-Blow-Amid-Palworld-Lawsuit/comment/9813866#entry-comment-9813866 !)

As part of their ongoing lawsuit, Nintendo is claiming PalWorld has violated those… now invalid patents, so Nintendo’s overall case against PalWorld is now significantly more weak.

That directly contradicts your quote:

Since the application isn’t cited in the Palworld patent lawsuit directly, its rejection won’t have a direct impact on the ongoing case. However, as explained by Games Fray’s analyst Florian Mueller, the newly rejected application is a “key building block” in Nintendo’s strategy to capture a wide range of creature-capture system implementations. It is the child of patent JP7493117 and the parent of JP7545191, both of which are cited in Nintendo’s complaint.

IANAL, but IIRC atl in US law “child patent” just means it adds new claims to the parent patents’ technology, so this just invalidates the parts that Nintendo did not use in its lawsuit.

You’re right.

In Western regions (North America and Europe) around 2009, the video game industry saw the success of Zynga and other large publishers of social-network games that offered the games for free on sites like Facebook but included microtransactions to accelerate one’s progress in the game, providing that publishers could depend on revenue from post-sale transactions rather than initial sale.[23] One of the first games to introduce loot box-like mechanics was FIFA 09, made by Electronic Arts (EA), in March 2009 which allowed players to create a team of association football players from in-game card packs they opened using in-game currency earned through regular playing of the game or via microtransactions.[26] Another early game with loot box mechanics was Team Fortress 2 in September 2010, when Valve added the ability to earn random “crates” to be opened with purchased keys.[13] Valve’s Robin Walker stated that the intent was to create “network effects” that would draw more players to the game, so that there would be more players to obtain revenue from the keys to unlock crates.[23] Valve later transitioned to a free-to-play model, reporting an increase in player count of over 12 times after the transition,[25] and hired Yanis Varoufakis to research virtual economies.[27] Over the next few years many MMOs and multiplayer online battle arena games (MOBAs) also transitioned to a free-to-play business model to help grow out their player base, many adding loot-box monetisation in the process,[25][28] with the first two being both Star Trek Online[29] and The Lord of the Rings Online[citation needed] in December 2011.

I think it’s more bad because they were the first one to introduce all those predatory mechanics

The subscription is €5 a month