Am I missing something, or does nothing in TFA actually explain how they arrived at the conclusion that the attack was aimed at this one account? Seems like a huge conclusionary jump based on a very small amount of information.

I also have accounts on all three sites, how did they decide it wasn't aimed at ME? I assure you, I was very irritated that my "is teaching his coworker to make origami stars" tweet didn't go through.

I don't actively block ads on any of my browsing machines, though the proxy for work filters out the larger serving farms. I'm fine being served an ad, as long as it:

1. Doesn't pop up,
2. doesn't have audio unless I click (auto-sound and rollover sound are both very very irritating), and
3. doesn't consume huge amounts of system resources (xtube ads fail here massively).

Came here specifically to say this. How many times did the name of the product appear in the summary?

I count five times. In only FOUR sentences.

All of the motherboards I've purchased have placed the most dangerous of the BIOS settings behind jumper protection--You have to move J1 so it bridges 1-2 before you can change the CPU voltage, for instance.

This is why I don't watch the news: sensationalist media. The best way to get views/ratings is to scare people; wildly unnecessarily, in this case. When reporters use the word "nuclear" in a negative way, the people think Chernobyl/Three Mile Island. Explosion. People dead. Are completely unlivable for the next hundred thousand years.

This simply disables the operating system. In a very minor way, no less. Your data is intact, though you may lose some OS settings. Your brother-in-law's nephew could fix it. It's hardly the death of your family and complete irradiation of your living area. The author of this article is in need of a sense of proportion.

...HHG notwithstanding. =P

The thing about torrents is that once you have a portion of the file downloaded, your client begins uploading. So you ARE an uploader.