. . . but not fix them? Am I missing something?

"Ledger Nano X are used to store crypto. The spy implants are used to steal whatever crypto you store in those Ledger Nano X," Karpelès explained.

Damn that is one sophisticated explanation right there

"the company built a custom centralized source-control system called Scion, "

CLAUDE built a custom centralized source-control system called Scion,

would have been much funnier, especially given the name of the system.

I don't know, maybe you need to read what I said again. But to clarify for the less intelligent, what I mean to sound like is that I am stating that what the poster to whom I was replying said was not true. I hope that clarifies this for you. You might want to think about not reading into what people say.

Well I'm not terribly up on this whole subject, but further down thread someone gives the quote that you're talking about regarding the Romanis. He says they should be deported. You are lying. No big surprise but I thought someone should at least point it out.

Beat me to it!

I'm trying to understand why I should care about this guy's opinion about a hypothetical future that may or may not happen and what Apple's role might be in it. So far I've been unsuccessful.

"Similarly, it's not possible to assist with bypassing encryption because the hardware and software has been designed to prevent it."

I have no idea whether it's true in this case, but it seems like we've heard things in the past that sounded similar that turned out not to be true.

Clickbait headline talks about drying lake beds (plural). Actual study talks about only a single lake that was drained in the 1960s.

I would rather gouge both of my eyes out than watch a VHS tape. You are welcome to join us in the 21st century at any time.

There are far too many variables to do that successfully, and in any event you never know about the road not taken. Which is why I say no one can never tell you you were wrong.

No True Scotsman fallacy.

Am I confused, or was the pedestrian crossing the road who was hit by the ledt-turner in the video, which was of course not a real video of a real collision, crossing against what would have been a red walk sign? I'm not aware of any intersections where pedestrians are allowed to cross while left turns can be taking place. So this seems like a BS example to me.

What is the purpose of the word nevertheless in this sentence?

"Nevertheless, we take the security of the GNU system, the tools which make it possible, and the projects we host very seriously."

I too can make up numbers about an economy regarding what might have happened if something that happened didn't happen. Pretty hard to tell me I'm wrong.