Hackers acting as if they're doing a public service by bringing down a free publicly accessible tool is a new level of assbackwardness.
If the goal really was to force IA to increase their security, they would've tried to consult with them. This is more about notoriety and chaos and the hackers have no moral ground to stand on.
If you aren't comfortable doing that then you aren't comfortable "working on" your car.
You've written a whole lotta junk to essentially end on, "if you can't jack up your car and remove the wheel, you shouldn't be changing your headlight in the first place."
Which is quite a dumb take.
lmaoo thank you for the laugh
That's totally cool with me, I am absolutely a dumb idiot.
Difference is I don't go around correcting people's spelling to make them feel stupid.
oops for you, because in your comment you come off haughty and dumb. Happens to all of us though, no big deal.
insults someone for their spelling mistake
fails at simple reading comprehension
heh, oops!
Have you happened to read the book? He has a chapter dedicated to his decision to call it technofeudalism rather than capitalism, hypercapitalism, technocapitalism, etc. Basically he's saying profits have been decoupled from a company's value, and that it's no longer about creating a product to exchange for profit (which, in his words, are beholden to market competition) but instead about extracting rent (which is not beholden to competition -- his example is while a landowner's neighbors increase the values of their properties, the landowner's property value also increases).
Anyways he describes Amazon, Apple store, Google Play, cloud service providers, as fiefdoms that collect rent from actual producers of products (physical goods, but also applications), and don't actually produce anything, themselves, besides access to customers, while also extracting value from users of their technologies through personal information. They're effectively leasing consumer attention in the same way landowners leased their lands to workers.
It sounds pretty accurate to me, but I haven't had much time to chew on it. What's your take on that idea?
Sorry, buy-it-for-life
I kinda like the idea of a phone that is usually small, but I can make big by unfolding it if I want to. But I do agree that the fewer moving parts, the sturdier and more BIFL. It's just that BIFL is not really attainable anyways in the current state of the phone market due to software support obsoletion.
I'd like to see a small eink phone or the tiny matchbook from Her.
Looks like Skill Up on YouTube did not recommend -- I typically trust his takes over review outlets