gruez

7 ms·

31.
by gruez 6d ago
Cognition, the same company that a few years ago demoed a coding bot purporting to be able to autonomously complete upwork tasks, but upon closer inspection was going off the rails and not even completing what was asked? https://
32.
by gruez 7d ago
It changes the economics of the attack because it requires the attacker to do compute before they can make requests. Depending on how good the fingerprinting is, it can also get very expensive (eg. requiring you to run a full browser, rathe
33.
by gruez 7d ago
Just like people complaining about "phablets" a decade ago right? "more bulky than a phone, smaller than a tablet"?
34.
by gruez 7d ago
>Perhaps it's something like: families that earn enough to have one parent stay at home don't use child care. Therefore children in child care are more likely to be from less affluent families than those who are not in child ca
35.
by gruez 7d ago
>looking at the radio? Current trend nowadays is watching tiktok, though thankfully I've only seen it at red lights, but that might just be because I'm not staring at other drivers when driving around at 40mph.
36.
by gruez 7d ago
Rivian didn't do any preliminary tests with safety drivers, or on a closed course?
37.
by gruez 7d ago
>Yes, he would be banned from driving if he ran over a kid. Realistically no, unless he was hilariously reckless. > SMITH: There’s the case that happened with the little boy on the Upper West Side, Cooper Stock. He and his dad were
38.
by gruez 7d ago
So what does this mean for Timmy (16 years old) learning how to drive? Should that also be banned, lest he runs over some kid? Or does he get a pass because he's a human and not a faceless corporation? Maybe he can repay the favor in 6
39.
by gruez 7d ago
>which could be in the details of how care is provided and its quality This has "true communism has never been tried" vibes. When enacting a policy, you can't guarantee it will come out optimally, so it makes sense to fact
40.
by gruez 8d ago
>connection != account That's not much of a distinction considering that it's trivial to create an email/account (without a phone number, even!) with fake information.
41.
by gruez 8d ago
>I didn't say anything about what al-Qaeda wanted Given that Bin Laden is al-Qaeda's leader, it's approximately correct to treat them as the same entity, unless you're arguing that there's some factional struggle
42.
by gruez 8d ago
Which was why it was widely considered a dumb move on the part of Bin Laden. It attracted all sorts of unwanted attention, that ultimately led to the the core group losing all relevance. The other al-Qaeda franchises might be doing well,
43.
by gruez 8d ago
>GrapheneOS is also saying some suspicious stuff on Mastodon in which they are failing the vibe check. Using "failing the vibe check" as your first argument fails my vibe check. >They are suddenly very AI obsessed, which is
44.
by gruez 8d ago
Presumably whoever is doing the acquisition would look at the financial numbers in addition to the subscriber numbers? Then they'll notice a discrepancy between subscriber count and how much $ is coming in, which makes this whole thing
45.
by gruez 8d ago
>They've never witnessed functioning policy on any front. Bin Laden wanted to destroy America, and he succeeded beyond his wildest dreams. This is revisionism. The agenda of al-Qaeda was to establish a caliphate. The whole "al‑
46.
by gruez 8d ago
>Another post gave an example of a real SAT question, which I will present below: As other X users have noted, it might just be a "easy" question and not reflective of the entire test. Also from a test perspective it makes sens
47.
by gruez 8d ago
No, it's a numbers game on both sides. Attackers are after hundreds or thousands of accounts, not just one. Defenders knows that exactly 0 hacks are impossible to achieve, and they're just trying to limit losses from fraud, but al
48.
by gruez 8d ago
Youtube page, which has auto-generated transcripts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLEkUGuw374 tl;dw: 1. it's expensive 2. requires online connection and account to unlock bootloader 3. lenovo (the parent company) had
49.
by gruez 8d ago
>CAPTCHAs don't work anymore, at this point. AI can trivially solve them. The point is to raise the cost, not to create some impenetrable barrier. A $5 vps can make hundreds of requests per second. IP bans and rate limiting forces p
50.
by gruez 8d ago
I just tested and it's the "real" recaptcha, with requests to google and everything. It still might be "fake" in the sense that the server rejects any response, even valid ones, which is probably what's actuall
51.
by gruez 8d ago
>CAPTCHA for login should just be outright illegal How do you prevent credential stuffing attacks? >especially if it blocks important functionality like closing your account. That just falls under standard tort law, not to mention rec
52.
by gruez 8d ago
I'm not sure why this is downvoted. It approximately checks out. An "assessment" only counts if your server tries to verify it, so you could conceivably use recaptcha for "free" if you don't bother validating t
53.
by gruez 8d ago
They have some spat with cloudflare, so they "punish" cloudflare users by sending them into infinite captcha loops
54.
by gruez 9d ago
The far more likely explanation is that your unifi dashboard's device identification logic is broken and is misreporting the device. Otherwise it doesn't make sense for samsung to engage it a massive conspiracy of putting wifi har
55.
by gruez 9d ago
Which? All I've seen over the years is people repeating the same rumor.
56.
by gruez 9d ago
>and it will connect to any open WiFi I've seen this claim made over and over again for various smart TVs, but so far I haven't seen any concrete evidence of this, only random speculation.
57.
by gruez 9d ago
>Mobile first isnt exactly a new concept either... It's not a landing page for some SaaS, it's a manuscript for some academic publication. "Mobile first" is definitely not top of mind.
58.
by gruez 9d ago
>a PDF and zoom and it's still messed up for reading Works fine on my machine. Maybe don't view from a phone, I guess?
59.
by gruez 9d ago
>The possibility that judges can abuse constitutional interpretation is an argument for doing it carefully, not selectively. Or, as Joseph Story put it: "The circumstance, that so construed the power may be abused, is no answer. All
60.
by gruez 9d ago
Give how vague constitutional clauses have been (ab)used to sneak in legislation through the judicial system (eg. roe v wade, or louisiana v. callais), the last thing we need are even more avenues to sue the government just because the plai

More ›