Is "Recently recommended" works such that it puts the most recently linked video at the top? Because currently the top video's most recent linking post is 79 days old.
This is nice that you're walking them through it but I wonder why you'd need a tablet in the first place, then? It's better to sit with them in front of a monitor with the proper posture and viewing position.
> The code, the test programs, the review behind the list above and the
first draft of this text were done with an LLM coding assistant (Claude
Code) under my direction. The measurements were run on my machine.
I noticed lately that recent LLMs write very short sentences, sprinkling so many periods over one paragraph. I'm pretty sure that this is some new regression that we're having with new models.
Hmmm I was using Claude Opus for the most part. I didn’t notice any particular shortness in the length of the sentences, but that’s also an issue in itself – the whole thing is just average fine-ness: the sentences are fine, the paragraphs are fine, everything is generic and inoffensive and fine. But at the same time it was giving huge amounts of pushback when I was getting it to interrogate logical faults of certain domains, to the point where I was having to argue with and even convince an AI using data and even its own analysis that there was cause to talk about certain things from a certain angle (can appreciate I’m being vague about which things). It can’t write complex, deeply-claused sentences (or won’t). And it also wants to write snappy little concluding sentences that make a fairly well-argued piece of sociological analysis read like Sex and the City or something.
And just like that, the book got abandoned.
N.b. some of its analysis and laying out of faults in arguments was actually pellucid and brilliant, it can’t be denied. Just it comes with prose that can’t really be used for anything. And even on another occasion when I got it to help me redraft and extend a different book of mine, then it randomly and consistently started stripping out all the stylistic flourishes out of my sentences, to the point where it couldn’t notice that word choices were very deliberate and actually set up little punchlines and logical payoffs paragraphs or chapters hence. And even when I explained and showed it what it was doing, it was like “ahh that’s so clever and brilliant” but just continued to do the same thing.
That's a side effect of people bashing the em-dash and the labs rushing to correct. The period is the most common replacement (along with some minor tweaks to sentence structure), so now that models are being RL'd away from the em-dash the models are overusing a new construction.
That's stupid. People didn't bash the em dash because it was an em dash. They bashed it because it made it obvious it was AI. If your product is so good why are your customers ashamed of using it?
Honest take: people aren't ashamed of using AI, they're trying to avoid being cancelled by rabidly anti-AI ideologues who would hate AI output even if it was the best thing they'd ever seen.
> Separately, we shortened packet queues—the lines packets wait in between stages of the pipeline. The queues are there to absorb bursts of traffic. Testing showed that most of that depth went unused, while shorter queues meant less waiting time and less memory overhead.
"lines"? "depth"? I feel like there is some context missing here. What are these terms they refer to?
Indeed this is an odd disclosure and I am not familiar with past posts by them.
Moreover, no CVE is associated with this claimed vulnerability. It's not even stated which Android version or automotive head-unit variant version is affected.
Wikipedia's source policy makes it nearly impossible to refer to anything that is not in the media, and any sensitive article has to use weasel words like this. Are you just noting the issue with the article, or actually doubting that Kaspersky Labs is a de-facto FSB branch since at least 2015?
Up until 2015 all was good with Kaspersky. But then in February of that year they posted a detailed writeup on malware created by the Equation Group, the NSA. [1] Within a month US media outlets, relying on anonymous sources, began posting endless claims that Kaspersky was a part of the Russian government. Over the next years Kaspersky opened a bunch of 'transparency centers' offering full code audits and inspection, relocated their core infrastructure and customer data to Switzerland - subsequently falling under their data regulations, and so on.
And if they were in any way affiliated with the Russian (or any) government, there seems no logical reason they'd publicly share their findings of the NSA malware, let alone the other transparency actions. Their data would be vastly more valuable if kept secret, because it'd open the door to greater exploitation of US cyber activities and being able to covertly secure desired systems. Instead their actions benefited everybody, but obviously embarrassed the NSA and as a result the US.
KL is a credible shop, they basically founded the modern anti-malware industry and pioneered most basic techniques in the 90's and early 2000's, together with some of their then-rivals like Dr. Web. There's a reason they were trusted, and there's a reason they tried to deny their takeover, they have a genuinely earned reputation.
This doesn't mean they aren't a FSB branch, in the same way e.g. NSO Group is a Mossad branch, with one difference that KL sell themselves as defensive and NSO Group doesn't. It was confirmed by KL employees in their socials that the management has been largely taken over by actual FSB officers. Some have left the company out of protest because they felt it's getting raided (отжим in Russia is not like your usual corporate takeover...). It's impossible to link it now as most of these people are living abroad since 2022 or earlier and either removed all their stuff or their socials entirely, some have renounced their citizenship by this point. But as a general rule, assume every important business in Russia is taken over by the government since 2022, either directly or indirectly. In 2026, whitewashing Kaspersky Labs of all companies is weird.
>But then in February of that year they posted a detailed writeup on malware created by the Equation Group, the NSA. [1] Within a month US media outlets, relying on anonymous sources, began posting endless claims that Kaspersky was a part of the Russian government
There was also a war happening, which you aren't saying.
>Over the next years Kaspersky opened a bunch of 'transparency centers' offering full code audits and inspection, relocated their core infrastructure and customer data to Switzerland - subsequently falling under their data regulations
The audits are to check the checkboxes, they mean very little. Plenty of former Russian companies that moved abroad are keeping ties with the developers at home, despite all audits, fronting campaigns, and otherwise pretending they aren't (not all though, others did actually migrate).
>if they were in any way affiliated with the Russian (or any) government
I mean, YK himself is KGB and there are no former ones, as they say. KL is one of the main government cybersec contractors, for starters. In a country where the government controls most of the economy they are producing critical industrial security systems like data diodes and secure gateways with their own OS, you can go to their site and look at all this yourself.
Cybersec industry in general is heavily affiliated with their respective governments, I don't think it's a secret for anyone and denying this is just silly. Some of them are more than others.
>there seems no logical reason they'd publicly share their findings of the NSA malware ... Their data would be vastly more valuable if kept secret, because it'd open the door to greater exploitation of US cyber activities and being able to covertly secure desired systems.
What? This doesn't make any sense, sorry. Security agencies usually publish or leak actions of their adversaries.
>Instead their actions benefited everybody
Did their inaction benefited anyone? RuNet which has been great got basically destroyed and turned into a safe haven for half of world's cybercriminals on their proud watch, and they aren't writing anything on this. They serve as part of their "roof".
Note I'm not saying they aren't doing good things, you're right, it's pretty good when the spooks keep each other and cybercriminals in check, see the article in OP, Apple's hardware backdoors (Operation Triangulation), and many other cases.
Kaspersky isn't just a credible lab. They were, and remain, the best antivirus provider, by their results on basically any and all test batteries. Similarly their founder (Eugen Kaspersky - I assume who you are referencing with "YK") has never worked for the KGB. He was educated at at a KGB affiliated school and afterwards went to work for the Ministry of Defense. Within a few years the USSR collapsed and he then went, and stayed, within the private sector.
But most importantly - companies (let alone other governments) providing detailed information on how other governments' cyber operations is most certainly not a thing that's done. That report I linked to is not just speaking in evidence free vagaries of the geopolitical 'leak' type you are alluding to. It provided extensive operational details and includes things such as even naming a specific driver as which is implied as being a Windows backdoor with plausible deniability.
They chose to publish it letting the NSA know exactly which methods had been discovered, how they were discovered, and even exact versions they detected and potentially on exactly which machines (if the NSA salts binaries), given that the hash/date info were also provided. All of this is immensely valuable information that could have been both weaponized and 'defensized' for Russian cyber purposes. Providing it helped the NSA more than anybody. Outside of Trumpian 5d chess, there's no rational explanation for this, if one assumes they are in any meaningful way controlled by the Russian government.
The article is about a controversy involving allegations. There is plenty of evidence presented that the controversy and the allegations exist. (And if you dig into the links, there is plenty of evidence that the allegations are not without basis.)
Using web apps on Firefox really is the way given its support for uBlock Origin.
Screen real estate is precious on phones, so being able to permanently block "Install our app!" and even entire navigation categories (shorts on LinkedIn) is quite valuable.
Then you can "install" the site on your home screen or simply place it in collection folders so it's sitting ready on your "New Tab" page.
Firefox the privacy browser that is directly selling all its users searches to Google for decades? Not to mention all its other build in telemetry and ads.
If you want an actual private Firefox Browser use a fork like Mullvad Browser, LibreWolf and Tor Browser.
Mozilla with Firefox does not sell and does not have ads. You have downloaded a modified spyware version or have convonced yourself that this is true due to a bad dream. Take more care online is my advice yo you and don't spread false information either.
EDIT: this is the one for me https://www.myabandonware.com/game/the-greatest-paper-airpla...
reply