Huh, I hadn't realized that either. Maybe this sounds weird but I have a Pixel 6 and I still regard it as a new phone because it looks and behaves like one.
It's my work phone and it's newer and faster than my personal phone (both cpu and display refresh rate), there's only essential apps installed, every week it (grapheneos) notifies me of various updates, the screen and shell look pristine... Everything is literally good as the day it was bought but my work will say we need to have a new device be produced now :/
If the goal is to get companies to get their security in order, than showing porn is certainly one of the most effective ways. It'll put political pressure on the company that owns the billboards, for one.
Show a cute picture of Big Bird telling people to eat more pizza, and the company will just reset some passwords. Show a couple of choice scenes from Brazzers and the CEO just got a call from a government minister and suddenly the leaky hardware is getting replaced at breakneck speeds.
Works well too if the goal is just to get people to object to digital billboards.
Yea, it's harmless, and a criticism of digital billboards, and it can't be swept under the rug by the billboard companies as if it didn't happen. Really great stunt!
Contrary to what the religious warriors claim, I can assure you nobody's head is going to explode, nobody is going to get cancer, and nobody is going to suffer psychological damage by briefly riding past these billboards. Truly, let's get serious here.
Genuinely curious, as someone who was exposed to porn on several occasions as a kid (with seemingly no negative long-term consequences): what makes you think it's "really bad"?
Do you have kids? I can assure you that children are quite good at automatically blocking out everything related to intercourse and other sexual acts until they reach puberty. Like an advertisement for mortgages, they will just treat it as something that is probably relevant to adults, but not at all interesting to them.
Seeing some girl getting ploughed by a slab of a guy might raise questions (which is excellent, questions are always good, because then you as a parent can guide their understanding), but it won't harm them in the slightest.
Repeated exposure to porn is a problem, but that comes from teenagers having an intrinsic interest in sex and private exploration of unsavoury websites on the internet, not accidental viewing of a naughty billboard.
It fascinates me what people will defend publicly in the name of “hacker good, advert bad.” One of these comments also just builds a straw man: “it’s like someone yelling ‘fuck’ at a ballgame… it doesn’t mean the kid’s ruined,” but at least they don’t go as far as claiming it might actually be a good thing because “seeing some girl get ploughed by a slab of a guy” might just raise a constructive question in a child.
It's like the kid hearing someone yell "fuck" at a ballgame. Just because most people in the culture might agree it's not particularly age-appropriate doesn't mean the kid's ruined.
There's a huge difference between regular exposure via neglectful or abusive parents and "oops I saw a thing". More than a few kids have "walked in" on their parents too, I assure you.
You don't even have to do it before you have children. You can wait until they are six or so and have the autonomy to pick what they want to watch (under your guidance). For children younger than that, you pick what they watch and when they watch it. Every time.
Do start hoarding the better shows and series you know.
I started reading on the assumption it was posted here because it was interesting, but this paragraph cinched it:
> 1. You finished your last three rewarded ads. Every time a rewarded ad starts, the rule pushes false onto a list and keeps the latest three (lines 174–183). If the ad SDK reports that the reward was earned, it flips that entry to true (191–199). The check needs all three to be exactly true:
Pointlessly spun out prose. Pointless headers everywhere. Pointless lists. Yes, we understand what a list of booleans is, and that the game looks for a state where the last three are true. No need to spell it out like that.
Why do people post crap like this? Why do people post it to Hacker News? There is some merit to dissecting an attention sink ad-driven game, but this article just makes me feel like my attempt to grasp the meaning and writer's views fails every time — like I'm trying to grasp stalks of grain in a field, but my hand keeps passing through them as if they were holograms.
I would very much like to read people's thoughts with a forbearance for awkward prose, bad spelling, or suboptimal outlining, instead of that I get rewarded by text where the human who prompted it is suddenly absent.
Anyone looking to get into single player Quake should grab an engine like IronWail and just go through all three Brutalist Jams. These are essentially map packs with contributions from various mappers, linked by a museum like base map (as many jams do). Each successive Brutalist Jam pushes the boundaries of what a thirty year old base game can still do.
Log4Shell required that the attacker be able to generate a log message containing specific parameters. It was a severe exploit, but not one that worked in every Java application with the affected Log4j versions. Attackers had to find calls that logged user submitted text or query paths first. So the list of prerequisites was larger: had to be using Log4j and had to have logging of user generated text.
Still a very large attack surface, but not nearly as ubiquitous as this one.
Nope. The basic rule is that you don't do things with wolves you shouldn't do (like feeding them and thus gradually letting them get comfortable around humans), and that you don't do boneheaded shit like leaving a small child alone in nature (which is common sense in most of the world). For a wolf a three year old child is just about the same as a boar or small deer.
Anyone over the age of 12 though? Wolves won't bother you unless you've managed to fuck up nature to such an extent that they can't find their usual diet (deer, boar, etc.), and even then attacking an adult is really desperate.
There was an interesting interview with an Italian expert about wolves and people in the news this week:
(I hate this. This Pixel 6 works fine. But the end is in sight nonetheless.)
I'm glad GrapheneOS exists, so my next device will be this or another Pixel. At least the next one should last two years longer.
reply