My work phone is an iPhone, and we're required to use Outlook for work email. On average outlook gets patched twice a week for iPhone. The biggest flaw in it though has been there for years and clearly won't get patched.

Namely, Outlook for iPhone always defaults to reply all for emails with multiple recipients. It doesn't matter how long the list is, it will reply all unless you go out of your way to reply only to the sender. This has catastrophic consequences at large companies.

It is not uncommon to have email threads at my employer with dozens, or even over 100, recipients. When one goes out with any ambiguity we quickly see who on the list is reading it on their iPhone (vs their laptop) as they inevitably will end up doing a reply all without meaning to.

Apparently Microsoft sees this as a feature, even though they don't force this feature upon us in Windows.

The message is clear. If you find a vulnerability, don't go to a tech bro, hat in hand, hoping for a reward. Flog it on the dark web to the highest bidder.

You sound like a typical blowboy for Corporate Socialism. Social Darwinism for the masses, welfare handouts for the corporations.

The irony is that before the internet, it was a lot more difficult to find plans for building a guillotine.

I loved that show!

A person with hacking experience and an appalling sense of humour could modify the speech output into something like this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grA5XmBRC6g

I'm not sure why Americans are upset. You got what you voted for.

American exceptionalism is such fun to watch. One cannot help but be amused by the irony of a country full of people who believe a 120 hour work week leads to innovation, but who have somehow managed to forget that European and Japanese auto manufacturers have been eating the lunch of their US counterparts for decades. Ralph Nader wrote "Unsafe At Any Speed" back in the 60s, fer crapsake, but most of the improvements in US automobiles came about only because of pressure from technologically superior imports.

Thanks for a genuine LOL moment!

Ukraine is doing a pretty good job of intercepting Russian drones. Funny that US bases in the Middle East have been rendered unusable by Iran's very similar, "last generation" drones.

As I stated though, I fully expect that when the GOP digs themselves out of Trumpism, they will eventually deploy the "No True Scotsman" defense to claim that their cult leader was not a "true conservative" all along. But when they move the goalposts that far, will they be required to look at what they have so willingly mischaracterized in the past on the other side?

I've seen people make that argument before, that there is no difference. You can make that argument if you want, but if you can't provide a viable candidate then you're not helping anything.

Let me be extra direct here. I have never seen a candidate in a race I could vote in that I agreed with 100%. Frankly anytime I meet someone who tells me they agree with a politician 100% of the time I tend to want to tell them they need their head examined (unless they are themselves a politician, in which case doubly so). Even politicians like Bernie Sanders I don't agree with 100% of the time.

Complaining about the rules is not productive. We've seen what the SCOTUS will do about such arguments, we can't get help from them either. The only way to advance is to support someone who will actually do something useful. Pretending that they all do the same shit doesn't help either; there are meaningful platform differences. Just because Drumpf has held every position on every issue doesn't mean he doesn't stand for anything, either - he's actually followed through on some of his (very worst) initial promises.

I genuinely wish your comment was more satire than plain truth.

Your post history contradicts that. The correct statement is that you are against governments that are not run by your Lord and Savior. For you, the first rule that needs to go is the separation of church and state, you want to fuse the two forever together.

Given the explosion of sports betting, how long will it be before there's a lottery to pick the first athlete to die of a stroke or heart failure that can be linked clearly to performance enhancing drugs?

Put me down for a hundred bucks, a weight lifter and October 31, 2028.