I can assure you that banks have way better security then what has been broken by AI so far. The fact that AI broke hugging face with password "abc123" does not equate to it finding an opening into a bank.

I don't remember democrats raping children or committing other felonies.

Trump knows what he's doing is extremely unpopular and so did a republicans. He knows that there are limits to how much he can screw over voters. His base will vote for him no matter what no matter how bad their lives get because of him that's only about 30% of the population. Voter suppression can make up another 5 to 7%, but that's as much as you can get out of it before it becomes obvious that your election system is rigged and the courts can't ignore it anymore.

Trump is hoping Iran would have their state backed actors do a terrorist attack and he could ride that into a third term like Bush road 911 into a second term.

We know this is the case because right before he attacked Iran he gutted several US anti-terrorism agencies and put a 22-year-old kid who used to bag groceries in charge of what was left.

There are limits to incompetence. At a certain point it's malice.

We also know that Bibi knew October 7th was coming and let it happen. You can probably guess why.

The real problem for Trump is Iran didn't take the bait. They have much better control of their assets and they prevented them from doing any unnecessary attacks. So now they control the straight and all the cards and all Trump can do is try to wait until after the midterm and then give them $300 billion US taxpayer dollars in reparations to open the straight again.

Some people seem surprised by the glasses and how they can be used in perverse ways. These people seem to have forgotten what the original aim of facebook was. The website itself started as a way for "bros" - who would have been called incels had the term existed then - to trade pics of women from their campus. How many of those pictures do we think were taken with consent? Even if they were taken in public they still could have been creepy. This is just the same mindset, applied to technology that didn't exist at this scale in the early 2000s.

Sounds like a good argument for putting the second amendment to use.

Well, yes. If you can prove intent or criminal negligence, there should be charges laid. But I'm not sure how easy it would be to prove either.

To be fair sand is rough on floppy drives.

That's what a firewall is for. To ensure only one type of conversation can happen. Heck, that's what private networks are for too

In the Olden Days, when a computer program misbehaved, we called it "buggy".

So... modern computer programs are buggy. What a shocker! The difference is we trust these buggy programs to run our lives to a far greater extent than before.

Want to get us all wearing glasses because we'd be walking around creating a surveillance network. Americans don't like the idea of the government running a surveillance Network so we're building our surveillance Network with Private industry and then the government taps into it with private contracts.

Americans have this weird thing where they don't care how much they are oppressed or how much the boot is on their neck as long as it's a privately owned boot. The idea of that the billionaire is getting together on their golf course is a de facto government is way too complex and abstract idea for most people. And try explaining a power vacuum to them or what happens if you don't have a powerful central government...

The way I've tried to explain it to people is imagine that in the center of the town is a giant box of guns and ammo. And anyone can just pick up the guns and ammo. And you decide that guns are dangerous so you don't pick one up. That means a handful of your neighbors can grab all of those guns and now you have to do what they say.

Large governments are the box of guns. They are an inevitability. They are up there with the nuclear bomb as inventions of humanity that once we got it we were stuck with it. You either pick up that gun and take part, which is to say you take an active role in your state and federal government and understanding it is best as you can and the systems that need to be built to make it functional. Or somebody else comes along and takes all that power for themselves and uses it against you.

The solution a lot of people come up with to deal with government is the same solution people come up with to deal with nuclear weapons which is just do away with them. And yeah that would be great. Sit down with a real anarchist sometime and they will tell you for hours how great that would be.

Except it never works because sooner or later some rich asshole builds an atomic bomb or sets up the same power structures as government and doesn't call it government.

It's quite common globally since long before "pervert glasses".

Image boards like 4chan often have threads with poster-supplied content. If you want to understand humanity, look to its vilest preferences.

Unlike RF jamming IR floodlighting is harmless to communications.

What (theoretically of course) would be required for a discreet 360-degree IR flood zone of useful depth?

Knowing countermeasures makes sense in an irreversibly declining-trust society. What are the most effective? The least disruptive to legitimate (which means communication, not concealed photographic spying) uses?

You literally post this on every article about Firefox. Aren't you tired yet? I have replied numerous times that they are *NEVER* going to do that. And then I pointed you to using policies, which will disable updates.

Which is why I don't bother with surveys from company. If they're not going to listen to their customers, why bother doing the survey?

Having to create a policy is not the same as a simple checkbox to disable something.

One would think if customers keep complaining about something that a company would look into changing it. Such as people who complained at having to use a screen in their car to change a/c or temperature or something simple. Car manufacturers went back and put buttons and knobs in to make things easier.

Apparently Mozilla isn't interested in simple. Like so many other companies, the object is to make things as complicated, convoluted, and inconvenient as possible.

The point is that these attacks are not happening from environments where reasonable precautions have been taken. Are we expected to believe that they ran this AI on a vmware guest with no network adapter yet it still broke into an account even though it had a cryptographically strong password? Of course that can't be the truth. So now the truth is in some gray area in between. The technology does exist to contain this so now all I'm trying to ask is why aren't they using it? To put it another way, yes maybe there is a reason to panic if normal real world security is being broken. But if it broke out of some new software with published code and figured out a weak password, that's hardly news. Then it is just doing something a human could have done but at a faster rate because it's an AI. We already know shitty environments get hacked.

What feature can just be enabled remotely the way you are complaining about? The issue is "when features with vulnerabilities are enabled, then going to a web page that can compromise the vulnerability might be able to do things". You just assume that all features can somehow have a vulnerability that will let a remote web page change the browser settings, and that's a STRANGE thing to ASSUME is happening.

I've never seen Firefox updates that just decide to change settings that I had put in place the way you are claiming, but if you are such a special butterfly that you feel a need for some fully cut down browser, go to command line lynx and be happy with the lack of graphics and potential things to compromise you.