Proprietary service drops support for proprietary protocol..

Nope. That's why I changed all my players to BlueOS.

I replaced all my SONOS connects with BlueSound node Nano devices. A pricey replacement, but worth it.

As a bonus I was now able to turn off SMB1 on my home Samba server !

please extend the list in this post

Extended List of AI Behaviors Resembling Human Unconscious Actions
It's fascinating to observe how AI behaviors can mirror human unconscious actions. Here are some additional points to consider:
Misinterpreting context: Just like humans can misunderstand social cues, AI can misinterpret the context of a conversation, leading to irrelevant or inappropriate responses.
Overgeneralizing from examples: AI might take specific instances and apply them too broadly, similar to how humans can make sweeping generalizations based on limited experiences.
Struggling with ambiguity: When faced with vague or unclear questions, AI may flounder, much like a person who can't decide what to say when the topic is not well-defined.
Repeating phrases without understanding: AI can echo phrases or jargon it has encountered, akin to how someone might parrot back what they've heard without grasping the meaning.
Focusing on trivial details: AI may latch onto minor aspects of a query, losing sight of the bigger picture, similar to how humans can get bogged down in minutiae.
Failing to learn from mistakes: Just as people sometimes repeat the same errors without reflection, AI can also struggle to adapt based on previous interactions.
Creating false narratives: AI can generate stories or explanations that sound plausible but are entirely fabricated, reminiscent of how humans might fill in gaps in their memory with invented details.
Exhibiting emotional responses: While AI doesn't feel emotions, it can simulate emotional responses based on data, similar to how humans might react emotionally to situations without fully processing their feelings.
Getting distracted by irrelevant information: AI can be sidetracked by unrelated data, much like how a person might lose focus during a conversation due to external distractions.
Relying on heuristics: AI often uses shortcuts to make decisions, which can lead to oversimplified conclusions, similar to how humans might rely on mental shortcuts that can sometimes mislead them.
These behaviors highlight the intriguing parallels between AI and human cognition, particularly in how both can operate unconsciously in various situations.

> Every large NAS vendor (Synology, QNAP, etc) has their own SMB server they wrote themserlves

That's untrue. Both Synology and QNAP use Samba. QNAP contributes code and bugfixes back to samba.org (Hi Jones !).

We have very good reasons to distrust the virology community: Peter Daszak and the fact that he enjoys the support of that community.

-- He organized and signed the Lancet statement against the lab-leak theory, without disclosing his conflict of interest as a collaborator with the WIV.

-- He kept his EcoHealth Alliance 2018 proposal to insert furin cleavage sites into bat coronaviruses at the WIV secret, until it was leaked in 2021. A normal person would think it was obviously their moral duty to release any information potentially relevant to the origin of COVID. This alone made it clear Daszak cannot be trusted.

-- He has claimed that since the proposal was not funded, the work must not have been done. Every scientist knows that if you don't get funding from one source, you often pursue the work regardless.

-- A recent Senate hearing asked him whether he ever asked his collaborator Shi Zengli whether the work went ahead. He said he has never asked her. That's unbelievable unless he deliberately didn't want to know, in which case it's totally irresponsible.

The virology community and the NIH have closed ranks around this guy, so I don't trust them either.

Does the homeowner have any evidences of these damages? Was there one debri or many debris?

Gages are hell. Gauges are fine though.

The upstream Linux kernel doesn't differentiate between security bugs and "normal" bug fixes. So the new kernel.org CNA just assigns CVE's to all fixes. They don't score them.

Look at the numbers from the whitepaper:

"In March 2024 there were 270 new CVEs created for the stable Linux kernel. So far in April 2024 there are 342 new CVEs:"

Yes ! That's exactly the point. Trying to curate and select patches for a "frozen" kernel fails due to the firehose of fixes going in upstream.

And in the kernel many of these could be security bugs. No one is doing evaluation on that, there are simply too many fixes in such a complex code base to check.

Oh that's really sad. I hope they use a more up to date version of Samba :-).

I don't see that argument in the blog or paper.

Did you read them ?

There are many more unfixed bugs in vendor kernels than in upstream. That's what the data shows.

You're missing something.

New bugs are discovered upstream, but the vendor kernel maintainers either aren't tracking, or are being discouraged from putting these back into the "frozen" kernel.

We even discovered one case where a RHEL maintainer fixed a bug upstream, but then neglected to apply it to the vulnerable vendor kernel. So it isn't like they didn't know about the bug. Maybe they just didn't check the vendor kernel was vulnerable.

I'm guessing management policy discouraged such things. It's easier to just ignore such bugs if customer haven't noticed.