Reporting it makes sense. Investigating if the threat was credible makes sense. If it is credible, a felony then makes sense. But if it isn’t, a fine or misdemeanor is enough. Because I do agree that there should be some consequences to discourage how casually death threats and the like are thrown out these days.

But the idea that no tolerance rules that turn kids having outbursts (disability or not) into felons makes anyone safer is laughable. Making troubled kids unnecessarily lives harder is more likely to create more danger than prevent it.

Marketers using all of their skills to try to sell the idea that they’re a good guy doing something people (who aren’t ad buyers) want.

Sad part is they are probably able to fool some people.

I wonder what portion of her “support” is thinking “stfu already and gtf back to the kitchen and let the men handle this shit”.

Yeah, I’d think they’re going to produce what they are going to produce and will adjust allocation and prices to accommodate the demand change in the tariff country.

I don’t trust them either. But I can’t not trust them unless I trust you, which I don’t.

This feels like a variation of that two guard riddle except the warning is “both guards lie all of the time” and the two guards still don’t agree.

Which is resolved by the riddle itself being the lie. Applying that here means we should do the opposite and not (never trust anyone).

Now which way does that not apply?

• sometimes trust anyone
• never distrust anyone
• never trust noone
• sometimes distrust anyone
• never distrust noone
• sometimes trust noone
• sometimes distrust noone

Yeah, I think there is a lot of potential for code analysis. There’s a limited cross section of ways malware can do interesting things, but many permutations of ways to do that.

So look for the interesting things, like:

• accessing other programs’ address spaces
• reading/writing files
• deleting/moving files
• sending/receiving network traffic
• os system calls and console commands
• interacting with hardware
• spawning new processes
• displaying things on the screen
• accessing timing information

Obviously there’s legitimate uses for each of these, so that’s just the first step.

Next, analyze the data that is being used for that:

• what’s the source?
• what’s the destination?
• what kind of transformations are being applied to the data?

Then you can watch out for things like:

• is it systematically going through directories and doing some operation to all files? (Maybe ransomware, data scrubbing, or just maliciously deleting stuff?)
• is it grabbing data from somewhere and sending it somewhere else on the internet? (Stealing data?)
• is it using timing information to build data? (Timing attacks to figure out kernel data that should be hidden?)
• is it changing OS settings/setup?

Then generate a report of everything it is doing and see if it aligns with what the code is supposed to do. Or you could even build some kind of permissions system around that with more sophistication than the basic “can this app access files? How about the internet?”

Computer programs can be complex, but are ultimately made up of a series of simple operations and it’s possible to build an interpreter that can do those operations and then follow everything through to see exactly what is included in the massive amount of data it sends over the network so that you can tell your file sharing program is also for some reason sending /etc/passwords to a random address or listening for something to access a sequence of closed ports and then will do x, y, z, if that ever happens. Back doors could be obvious with the right analysis tools, especially if it’s being built from source code (though I believe it’s still possible with binaries, just maybe a bit harder).

If it hasn’t happened already, it wouldn’t surprise me if useful instrumentation space is reallocated to advertisement space at some point. Though hopefully the consumer rage in response would end whatever company tries that first.

Yeah, realizing I was an idiot implies I’m a bit less of one than I was before I realized.

I want to see some videos of salesmen trying to sell touchscreens like they are cars of the future and so great. Followed by the same salesman selling the return to tactile buttons as a big step forward because of how bad of an idea the touchscreens are.

Most likely the first one will be older, but I bet there’s many that could be lead to do both in the same day by two different people showing interest in the same model but different year of a vehicle.

Now I want to see a full-size keyboard with a special place to mount a phone and a shoulder strap. Maybe some wheels so it could double as a skateboard and you’ll be an 80s/90s image of a hacker.

Touch screen should have maintenance/status display and diagnostics and settings for things you’d take care of while the vehicle isn’t moving. Like seat/mirror positioning presets, ride height, towing mode, etc.

I use my four way hazard lights when there’s heavy braking on the freeway to make sure people behind me are paying attention. It’s a button on my dash and pretty easy to toggle.

Though is that something that touch screen cars really put into the touch screen!?

Yeah I hate it when information is hidden in the name of minimalism. I’d rather have a plane cockpit UI than a bicycle UI, even if it means I feel like an idiot at various points when I discover new things I could have been doing the whole time.

If we can’t figure out how to build stores and factories on Mars, what’s even the point of going?

I mean, just because the people who hired you want you to help one campaign doesn’t mean you can’t instead tell people what you really think when you knock on their door.

Or just say you’ll do it but instead go off and look for a different job.

Or do what they want but lean into it way more than they want people to admit. “Now just be aware that soon there will be a night where you’re going to need a very long knife so we can purge the undesirables from our own ranks. You know, once we no longer need their disgusting support.”

Come on, Billy, you need to bulk up by mid December so you’re heavy enough to pull the rope that opens the curtains! The entire play depends on you!

You take that back! I’ll have you know he voted three times and would have voted even more times if his friend group had known the location of any other polling stations!

Oh but some do create very helpful content like “repost!” comments to help people seeing old content from getting embarrassed by not realizing all discussion about that content has been done already.

Some try to improve stories by adding claims of applause or a famous person offering a sum of money, probably because it’s silly to imagine such embellishments and they like joining in on the fun.

You can load a truck with fuel cells to extend range beyond what the current infrastructure can handle.

It’s more complicated with batteries that need to be charged. Sure, there’s a grid in many places, but if combat capability depends on the grid, it’ll get targetted. And even before that, capacity is a concern and if the grid can handle a tank battalion wanting to plug in every tank so they can be ready for whatever comes next ASAP.

Fuel cells mean they can set up behind the front lines and use power more predictably and refuel tanks quicker than gas.

Thanks for the detail!

And I agree that maybe they should be using something else. Though one risk with using something that few others are using is that it can also be used for targeting and tracking. Like if someone knows the bodyguards use shortwave communicators and that there’s an event at some location, they could have drones set up to just target those frequencies when they see them.

It’ll always be an arms race, at least if the players realize they are in an arms race and don’t just willingly carry tracking devices.