Was Zuckerberg's makeover supposed to be a popularity move? I just assumed that it was self-expression on the part of someone who finally realized that the best part of having functionally unlimited money is that other people's opinion of you matters little.

The idea that what he's doing now is some kind of polished PR persona seems wild.

"Mark of the web" metadata is used to indicate if a file was downloaded.

7zip inadvertently stripped the metadata which meant it disabled some additional security scanning that takes place - if you decompressed the file it didn't get applied to the inner files.

This trait was exploited by several pieces of malware to silently install themselves because Windows believed the file was obtained from a trusted source.

7zip now properly respect the flag and sets it on files unpacked from 7zip archives with the flag set.

WinRAR stripping it just means all the malware moves to RAR files now, so I'm guessing most virus scanners will simply block RAR files from now on.

If you ever wonder why people might send a double-compressed file like a zip file inside a 7zip file, that's because the inner compressed file is the real payload and they were taking advantage of the trust status to be able to silently install without a confirmation of file origin.

Indeed, Apple appears to be saying that the poor security of iCloud is now putting UK users at risk.

It's interesting that it only applies to new users. The UK wants a backdoor into existing user's accounts as well, so Apple still hasn't complied with their demand. They could roll out a software update that sends the keys to Apple on request, which is doubtless what the UK government will want.

It's not the security of the iCloud service. That stuff is, effectively, stored unencrypted on Apple's servers. It may be encrypted, but in order to have access to iCloud on the web and such, Apple has to be able to decrypt it. So it's effectively unencrypted for all concerned. And this has always been true for cloud services in order to be able to access the data anywhere.

Apple does offer "Advanced Data Protection", which the user generates their own encryption key, and the data is sent encrypted and stored on Apple's servers. This requires a bit of key management on the user's part because Apple no longer holds the key, so they have options you can use to back up your key and options to transfer it to a new device since everything would need that key.

To satisfy the UK government, they disabled the option to enable ADP. This lets them still service iCloud data requests since the data is effectively unencrypted. And this has been true since the beginning - Apple regularly offers the iCloud data to LEOs for crimes.

As for existing users, Apple can't force anything. Apple doesn't have the key to the user's data. And Apple would basically have to force the user to hand Apple the key to disable ADP.

Apple is hoping that the courts will force Apple to force the users to hand over the ADP keys. That's why the deadline is "in the future" - the courts will have to push Apple to force users to hand over their keys. Of course, that court case will be heavily publicized and debated over, and Apple will ensure that users are fully aware of what's happening.

GitHub CEO Thomas Dohmke answers to the Microsoft Board, who owns GitHub. That same board also has one of the most expensive investments in a tech company, ever, through its demi-acquisition of OpenAI.

Does this strike the Author of The Star's article, Steve Lohr, as a conflict of interest worth noting with as much as a small half sentence at the end of the article? No. Why would it? Bloviating about the future of technology is what tech CEOs do, and questioning them might imperial your access.

Exactly. Hell, I wouldn't care if it used even more. I have retinal tears in both my eyes from extreme stigmatism, and the floaters in my eyes drive me nuts on white backgrounds, but are almost invisible on dark backgrounds. I pretty much do all my word-processing and spreadsheet work on dark backgrounds.

The whole point of twitch is live streaming. The key word is "live". In other words, if your job is "content creator - streamer" then it's your job to upload new content regularly.

Expiring content after a week is a way to do this - you're supposed to broadcast your gaming sessions. It's not a VOD service

Twitch is more of a live TV service where you can watch people play games now. They have limited DVR capabilities. If you're someone who wants to have recordings of your sessions for later playback, then you'd want to use YouTube or something. Likewise, the compensation rates are different.

The best bit was the Underground apps, which were apps offered free with no paid DLC or anything. Amazon had ads on the app, and paid developers based on the time spent on the app.

A few apps were great because they offered a lot of DLC for free.

I guess I got to back those apps up.

It's a file explorer. I don't remember the last time I wanted that sort of stuff synced across computers, other than maybe twice. The first time when moving to that computer when it was new, and the second when I move to a new computer.

Beyond that, everything I do on the computer doesn't need to be synced across all my computers. Knowing I accessed my tax documents on my home PC isn't exactly relevant to me on my gaming PC, for example. Or on my handheld PC.

Recents? Favorites? I never set up a PC the same way twice, and those seem useless to be synced on other PCs. Knowing my favorite album I listen to that might not be stored on my other PC?

If I do need files synced, Microsoft has OneDrive, there's also DropBox, Google Drive, Apple iCloud, Box, and dozens of other services that let me sync data between my PC and the cloud.

Syncing to the cloud is very handy and useful for a lot of things. I don't see how browsing and managing local files is one of them.

Let's be more clear about what's happening.

Understanding all the rules of chess and inferring the game state and making illegal moves it knows are illegal is not what's happening.

What's happening is it's been trained on a million+ games where a series of moves has a next move, and there's a pattern to that. It internalizes that pattern and understands what's likely to come next.

Only... small differences in move order can completely rearrange the board's state, which is part of why chess is a fun game in the first place. It doesn't "understand" that a queen being taken removes a queen from the list of moves it can make. It might see a pattern where kx(wherever queen moved last) makes queen moves less likely in the future, but that isn't the same as understanding that the queen is gone.

if they had been federally charged for their phone freaking in the 70's.

The reason they got away with it was because everyone else was doing it. Jobs only knew about phone phreaking from the Esquire article on the topic - he read the article over the phone to Woz and Woz was the one who designed the hardware. Ironically Woz's design was all digital and worked far better for it than analog blue boxes.

But it was the publication of that article that basically had the entire world doing it, and many people remarked how it would be the end of phone phreaking as they knew it.

I would call it "The Knack". A good engineer has it and it's something that goes beyond intuition - if something is wrong, they know it, even if they can't articulate what.

It's when you're in the middle of coding and then something says you've done something wrong that has you scrapping your design and restarting. Or you have no clue where to start or something is complex, so you do a little bit and then the rest of it starts making a lot of sense.

I've seen someone try to code something using AI, and it was painful to watch. Granted, they were deliberately using AI to do it, and the job wasn't terribly difficult but it just was painful to see the code get revised over and over and over again.

And it didn't work. Because the person demonstrating the use of AI didn't know how it worked, he couldn't fix it other than keep asking ChatGPT "I got this error". At one point it lost half the lines of code.

In the end I don't know if he ever got the code working - it ended and it still was broken in weird and wonderful ways. In the end, I don't know how much it cost to produce that code, though I've heard from many other people that it's likely quite expensive in the end.

Or they would rather those companies supporting the SLS petition la Presidenta to contribute directly to his bank account./blockquote

More like how Trump's cuts have actually hurt the red states a lot more than they've been hurting the blue ones. And how those states hate it so much, none of the congress critters dare show their faces.

Meanwhile in the blue states, they had town hall meetings with record breaking attendance - 10,000 to 20,000 people call in to hear what's going on.

Chances are between SpaceX and SLS, suddenly a lot of red states are going to feel the cuts to NASA.

Of course, a lot of it are unintended side effects, and why previous administrations have done little to do anything about it. Just the bluster of this one seems to be more of repeated own goals rather than "own the libs".

This sets quite a precedent and that you can no longer trust Valve and their decision making.

Valve doesn't make many decisions - they always had a very light touch on what games they'd allow in the stores. Games aren't subject to approvals or anything. The bar is fairly low to sign up as a game developer to put a game on Steam.

At best they probably send the binaries through a virus scanner but that's about it. And I think that's how this was caught - the scanner got updated and detected it, but not after a few people had downloaded it.

And there are good reasons to have Rust in the kernel. You know why it affects Asahi Linux? It turns out a lot of the more complex Apple Silicon Mx drivers are written in Rust. Like the GPU driver. The maintainer claims doing it in Rust cleans up their driver significantly. And the goal is to move more of the drivers from C to Rust to improve maintainability.

So if you want to know why Linus has a strong pro-Rust belief, it's because it's one of his pet projects and they're benefiting from Rust.

Many lawyers have been sanctioned. In fact, it's made the news so much that no lawyer should be using AI at all.

I mean, it was bad enough when the lawyer in the airline case used AI - the court sanctioned him, forced him to pay the defense's legal costs for wasting their time researching non-existent cases, and threw the case out with prejudice. The judge did tell the plaintiff to take the damages and sue their lawyers.

And this has happened many more times. So many times it's not even funny. It was so bad, the expert witness on the use of AI used AI to generate their paper and was caught. Now, the state lost their key expert witness, but more seriously, the "AI Expert" who taught AI courses at a prestigious university, now has to explain why they are an AI expert who fell for the most basic of AI failures - the hallucinations.

Meanwhile, the courts have always required lawyers to double check their filings - make sure ever citation used actually exists (AI can make very convincing fake cases as part of their hallucinations), and other things.

So I don't get why it keeps happening - this isn't the first, won't be the last, yet you'd think after hearing about it in the news all the time lawyers would figure it out by now. Especially since every submission carries their signature that they've verified the contents of what they're submitting.

It also doesn't take more than a few minutes to check every citation used in a document - they're a standardized format, and anyone with a basic law library subscription can easily pull up the citation by the actual value and make sure they actually exist, and that it says what you think it says. Basically all AI citations are discovered because they're fake, so anyone spending 5 minutes on a search engine can find out of it's real or not. (The other side may spend much more time as they want to make sure you're citing something real so they may actually incur hours of billable time verifying that the citation doesn't actually exist and it's not just not in their system.