I like how this article was right below one on AI agents accessing bank accounts. For decades I was told to conserve power and water just so companies can use it to run data centers and lay off workers, undermine financial systems, generate scams...

ResiP apps are highly problematic. While the premise of having easy access to a nearly infinite number of residential IPs for super cheap is appealing for all sorts of reasons and may even have some legitimate uses such as for anti-circumvention campaigns that would route traffic from activists in democracy challenged environments through residential IP exit points thus mitigating the abuse penalty incurred by commercial or Tor gateways, abuse of ResiP systems is rife, likely dominant.

Servers used to see script kiddies attack via abuse tolerant VPNs or colo/virtual host tenant farms and so were easily managed by detecting a pattern of malicious attacks coming from a finite number of IPs or C-classes or domains and against this reactive intrusion detection tools and IPBLs have been useful. Someone attempting credential stuffing might get a few guesses down the most common password/account list combos before being locked out and then move on to the next target in their list. Now logs are filled with the same sort of attacks: password:toor@server.com, pasSSword:toor@... etc but each sequential try comes from a different IP, often a different country. Dynamic block lists exploded from dozens (my Fail2Ban list ran 50-200 or so IPs) to thousands of IPs (today 8,065 IPs and 514 C-classes, most listed for one obviously malicious connection attempt).

Tor exit nodes do carry some of the same issues and running one will result in reputational consequences for your IP, just as running a ResIP app will for every connection you pair with.

A difference in practical implementations that matters is that setting up a Tor exit node isn't trivial and the consequences are well documented; the people capable of doing so generally also competent to comprehend those consequences. ResiP apps require no particular competence and are often marketed in deceptive ways. Further, the "exit point" moves with the user-device. Everywhere they go, they spew malicious traffic and criminal activities over whatever end point they connect with: home, friends, LTE, coffee shops. Every hotspot the device pairs with becomes a victim of the crimes enabled by the app.

ISPs need to look for indicators of ResiP exit nodes (if you block the command and control domains, you'll see traffic move to direct DNS across all commercial DNS providers, block those and traffic moves to DoT and then DoH, at which point the ISP should blacklist the client until they clean up their proxyware infection.

We use both in production here; but, let's be VERY CLEAR: there is absolutely NO FAIR COMPARISON between a locally hosted model on above-average hardware and what Anthropic (and I assume others) is offering with their, currently, subsidized plans.

"Over the years, there have been many Hoaxes, all generated by the Radical Left Dumocrats, for purposes of destroying our Country."

Seriously? This is how the leader of the US talks and people find it acceptable? Is he president of the nation or an internet troll? Maybe some ranting talk radio twit.

I love how Trump is this amazing guy who can get anything done but for some reason is crippled by people who have been out of office for years (e.g. Obama, Biden). Also, these people were "incompetent and weak" but somehow were so powerful they still control the nation.

But the purpose of the stop was not enforcement of the vehicle code.

"When there is not probable cause to believe that a driver is violating any one of the multitude of applicable traffic and equipment regulations 24 -- or other articulable basis amounting to reasonable suspicion that the driver is unlicensed or his vehicle unregistered -- we cannot conceive of any legitimate basis upon which a patrolman could decide that stopping a particular driver for a spot check would be more productive than stopping any other driver." Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648, 661, 99 S. Ct. 1391, 1400 (1979)

In California, as I suspect in most states, the driver is required to produce a license and registration when being pulled over for a traffic stop.

California Vehicle Code 12951(b) states: "The driver of a motor vehicle shall present his or her license for examination upon demand of a peace officer enforcing the provisions of this code."

Since the vehicle was not involved, the stop would not require a license to of produced. Of course, the cop would lie and make up a reason.

You are conflating a consensual encounter with a detention.

No, when they decide not to show up or release someone that they should have detained.

Read Terry v. Ohio | 392 U.S. 1 (1968) and Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada (2004) 542 U.S. 177

I have reported crimes, but LAPD refused to make arrests.
I had a cop argue with me and tell me that I was not authorized to have an arrest made because I was a building manager. I had to explain real property law to him.

In many states, there is no requirement to show ID unless arrested. In other cases, there still has to be reasonable suspicion (the Terry standard).

Detaining someone for 1 second without reasonable suspicion violates the 4th amendment. Pulling someone over is not a consentual encounter, but the officer is probably trained to turn it into one. Extending the stop is unconstitutional. See Rodriguez v. United States, 575 U.S. 348, 135 S. Ct. 1609, 191 L. Ed. 2d 492 (2015),. I suspect that even a diminimus extension would be unconstitutional. So, a false report could be argued a civil wrong, even when causing a deminimus delay.

The "might be armed?" might not be a crime. The defense would argue that there is a possibility and argue that it might not meet the standard of reasonable doubt. But in a civil case, it could meet the preponderance of the evidence.

How much would you like to bet that Flock's lawyers told them what exactly to say when calling the police?

I am sure you know this and are just trying to shit on the editors, as one does on /.; but here, use this in case you didn't know: https://xcancel.com/_lyraaaa_/...

None of that is true. Grow up and learn how to understand and rate journalism. Start with Appling the spj code of ethics to media.
" Anyone who defends that is off the deep end self-deluding and in full on denial of reality. "
So you post a factual incorrect statement then call anyone with facts delusional. JFC, take some actual media course. Like, in a class room.

He's incapably of learning. I don't thing he has learned anything since 1980.