lxgr

All traffic? In particular, I'd expect new connection establishment to go through a software path, looking up port forwarding and firewall rules etc. and creating hardware forwarding table entries if applicable.

Not always, see e.g. "punishing heat", i.e. sense 2 here: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/punishing

I was using that sense, and being hyperbolic with "crime". Cloudflare can cause bad outcomes for browser heterogeneity without any malicious intent whatsoever.

> carrier will resend the text message as there was no acknowledgment

I don't think this is what happens here, as this could then be fixed by providers filtering inbound messages with this content after the fact.

Rather, the SM seems to be stored in a database on the Android device and repeatedly processed, which is potentially much harder to fix.

Sounds similar, but the problem is exactly that I don’t think there’s any way to disconnect such a session, nor to even see that it is connected to my computer in the first place. There’s a small notice when initially starting it on the mac, that’s it.

If I get locked out or get served captcha after captcha on Firefox (with or without my ad blocker and extended tracking prevention disabled) but everything works flawlessly on Chrome there's really only one conclusion I can draw.

Just using Firefox is enough these days. I can't even book a train ticket on Firefox anymore. "Your behavior is similar to a bot. Try to log in to your account or use a different browser." My >10y tenured account with dozens of prior undisputed orders apparently does not matter as much as my user agent.

Doesn't work that well if you actually need to use whatever site is protected by Cloudflare. There often is a choice, but not always, these days.

It really depends on your IP, in my experience. I've had to provide tenured browser cookies for some sites quite a few times already.

Not sure that actually follows. I could say "the open web can't possibly win, Cloudflare just has too many resources compared to any individual site" just as well, and it would sound similarly reasonable but is probably an equally poor prediction.

I don't think there's a way to avoid this game at this point, so I'd rather fast forward and see what lies at the end, given how painful the way there already is.

I'll take the constant, predictable pain of some equilibrium over constantly shifting pain any day. For example, I know which websites just don't support Firefox for web standards compatibility reasons and can use alternatives, but I don't know when Cloudflare will next decide to lock me out of half of the web for my crimes of using a free browser.

Oof. Together with the fact that it's possible to remotely access the file system (!) of computers ever having started a "Work" chat in the ChatGPT desktop app [1], this seems pretty bad.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50078284

That's certainly one reason, but frontier LLMs are also really good at finding existing vulnerabilities in completely human-authored codebases.

It’s not always a choice. If value has been transferred onwards (ultimately in the form of e.g. cash withdrawn or something equally hard to trace, like physical goods handed over to a buyer), simply “undoing all transactions in a database” isn’t without victims either.

Whether undoing transactions or not is an option strongly depends on how fast value is allowed to move. Sometimes being slow is a feature as much as it is a bug.

The reason subresource/web application integrity is not more commonly used is that there is no plan to actually do anything with it.

How are you going to verify your thousands of dependencies, some of them obfuscated/closed source? And if you can’t, what does integrity buy you?

Deepfakes and slop, essentially, and I still expect more parts of that prediction (that I don’t want to spoil) to become true.

Sure, but not automatically generated text or image content.

> Binance isn’t headquartered anywhere.

Don’t fall for their propaganda. Everybody is ultimately headquartered somewhere.

> giving the individual complete control of their financial resources

This seems like a definitionally unachievable goal. How can you have finance without others that you ultimately need to trust, if only to be stable enough in their wants and needs to want to trade with you?

Neal Stephenson has worried (or rather hasn't, but I won't spoil the plot of "Fall" here) about deepfakes way before most people have even heard about generative AI.

If that's what it takes to promote his new books, I won't complain. Clear win-win, I usually get both a great book and a great podcast episode :)

I also really enjoyed this conversation including him: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7FN53FqB1U

I'd disagree. Especially his last two books are very much getting to the point, and I really liked Seveneves and Termination Shock as well, all after Anathem. ("Fall" is the exception that proves the rule/trend; I'll just pretend that didn't happen. One of the very few books I've ever not finished after making it beyond the first half.)

> as a complete and utter Stephenson fanatic, even I abandonded him at Anathem.

You might want to give his later stuff a try. I think he's really improved his ability to wrap a story up, without compromising on the grand ideas.

> Notice that the hacking is mostly happening with centralized venues.

That's not true at all. There have been so many smart contract hacks in the past.

Something very similar is true for ChatGPT on macOS. I was recently very surprised to learn that starting a "Work" conversation on my Mac would grant the agent session file system access which can later be used remotely, e.g. from a browser session logged into the same account on a different computer.

Given how many people likely share ChatGPT subscriptions, this seems highly problematic.

That's not much help if you don't vet all third-party dependencies closely, ideally at the source level pre obfuscation/minification.

How so? If anything, Ethereum can host trustless mixers more easily than Bitcoin due to its smart contract execution being Turing complete.

Maybe swap pools and/or law enforcement working together with stablecoin issuers are more vigilant about pools than they are about various DeFi lending pools, given that one usually represents a change of ownership while the other does not?

Who makes that promise? That's who you are ultimately trusting.

> Why would you even bother with a decentralized currency that can move freely across the globe when some centralized institutions can always interfere in the way legacy banks used to do with your money?

Regulatory arbitrage. Not all centralized institutions are fast enough to actually make use of the theoretical capabilities available to them.

What is the offline machine even doing then? Seems like you could replace it with a sheet of paper.

Then your scheme falls apart as soon as a backwards incompatible update is adopted by the blockchain.