lcnPylGDnU4H9OF

> stick to one topic: was the US the worst place for black people in the world? No it was not. Provide evidence that it was. Then I will point out to you that it was worse in other places.

Can you link the comment where anybody said it was the worst place? Brother, your claim is that, because some guy said that America is the best place in the world for Africans it must be true, and other people are just pointing out the things that make America bad for Africans. Nobody even said it was the worst!

Stop changing the subject.

> It's not a bad copy, or at least that's not what the person you responded to is insinuating.

FWIW, GP didn't write "a bad copy" but "bad copy", referring to the marketing sentence quoted by OP, rather than the model that was just released (as I presume "a bad copy" sounds, maybe like it's called that because it's [again, presumably] distilled?). "Copy", especially in a marketing context, is a written message.

> Note to others who are blaming Amthropic in various ways. This is what taking responsibility is.

It is way too early to tell if Anthropic is "taking responsibilty" for this. I'll be awaiting the news that they started aggressively hiring human support staff to field user complaints so they don't continue to do shit like this. That is taking responsibilty.

> The report is highly sensationalist in the "zero-click" aspect. It details to some degree the aspects of distribution and C&C but goes very vague the main point - what was the mechanism that activated that zero malware in a zero-click fashion.

It read to me like it was assumed to be using OS/browser/application-level exploits to get further access to target devices. I suspect the CitizenLab report is light on details in particular because they don't actually know them:

> In most cases, the user who sees the ad is not selected for targeting, and the server will not return any JavaScript to be executed.

> A large number of ads placed by Discover-Tech contain a script tag pointing back to what the company refers to as a “NOAS server” (also called a “getAd server”). This tag causes the ad, when rendered, to connect back to Discover-Tech, submit advertising identifiers for the user (either a cookie ID or a mobile ad ID), and automatically execute any JavaScript code returned. The NOAS server decides, apparently based on a combination of the source IP address and the advertising identifiers, whether the target is eligible to receive any JavaScript. If so, then code is returned. If not, a 0-byte response is returned. The NOAS server is a key part of Discover-Tech’s strategy, allowing Discover-Tech to avoid directly sharing malicious code, or even pointers to malicious code, with the companies who serve and display the ads.

Agreed it's against the guidelines as written but the interpersonal exchange is no different than someone quoting a blog post (and then not linking to it, to be fair). Something like this doesn't feel strictly bad, assuming disclosure and a link to the chat, sources included.

> Many, many, many Fortune 500 companies use Israeli cybersecurity services.

It's possible for this to be true, and that they spy on said companies on behalf of the government of Israel. It makes it easier to do so.

It's a bit unclear; the point the article makes explicit is that the commission raises prices when coupled with the most-favored nation agreements. There is the mention of "supplier-funded promotions" as "kickbacks", which might be from direct bookings.

> The CFTC is supposed to have 5 chairs, with no more than 3 in the same party.

Of course it's a policy that helps the two-party system become further entrenched. It should be no more than 2 from the same party. (Not that it matters given the fact only one is appointed, but still.)

Sometimes it is, sometimes it's not.