Why would I do that "frantically"? Most do not impact me, this one here is an example. Incidentally, my job is to teach that stuff, and it is perfect for explaining to students why they need to understand secure coding and secure systems, because AI cannot do that.

Yes. The problem is that these days, remote booting can and typically uses DHCP. And DHCP does broadcast-type requests that every machine in the network segment sees. Of course, an attack has to come from the same network segment or rather broadcast domain (which are typically the same) so this is not a regular "long-distance" remote vulnerability, but essentially a "network local" remote vulnerability. Still pretty bad.

To be fair, most regular systems will not boot over the network.

And it is, incidentally, not even about security of the machine. It is DRM - Digital Restriction Management. And it is off on all my systems.

Wear-out failures aren't always different from infant mortality failures, though. If the defect is caused by a design flaw in a component resulting in a structural weak point, that same weak point could fail after one use or a thousand, and it could just be a ticking time bomb. Someone could get very unlucky and find one that is slightly weaker, and it could break much sooner.

Case in point, I recall a machine where some people would have to have their laptops replaced every couple of months for motherboard failures, while others lasted for years, and it turned out to be dependent on how people closed their laptops at the end of the day and whether they pressed on the bottom of the case in a particular spot that wiggled the GPU. But if you handed one that had been working for five years to someone who used their left hand under the laptop while closing it, it would be dead in two or three months. If you replaced it with a brand new one, the brand new one would be dead in two or three months. And so on.

If you're arguing that people are bad at their jobs then so be it. Clearly someone fucked up at Warner in order to accumulate all that debt. At the same time, if the people getting bounced were really deadweight then they would have been included in the layoffs. They wouldn't be getting buyout offers and/or be getting pressured by an RTO order.

Don't bother. You are talking to one of those cretins that think anything they do not understand is easy. And that, of course, they never have to prove anything, because they are right by default.
 

Well. Yes. And no. What I predict is that the field will split into amateurs and engineers and the distinction will become blatantly obvious.

True.

Speak for yourself.

Maybe foldable screens are not a good idea at this time?

Seeing the number of morons who don't get in-your-face sarcasm I think it is time to bury slashdot for good.

Perhaps Chinese bubbles pop different than US bubbles?

New Apple slogan: "Pop Different!"

Apple does seem to suspect a bubble more than other big tech companies, they are taking it slower, letting others test the waters.

Correction: "After first the bots will look" should be "At first..."

Maybe there is a learning curve in switching between knowing what kind of mistakes humans make versus bots?

Somebody with say 10 years experience dealing with human mistakes will learn to spot problems and warning signs faster over time. If bots make different flavors of mistakes, then there will be a learning curve to get a feel for where and how bots tend to choke.

After first the bots will look like morons, but over time you'll realize they are just a different flavor of morons (compared to newbie or sloppy humans).

Reminds me of Trek episodes where it takes a while for the Trek crew to realize a species does things different, and adjust accordingly.

Fair assessment?