polonius-rex

i’d be shocked if they didn’t update it but i just timed myself doing it and it took less than 10 seconds

www.youtube.com##+js(json-prune-fetch-response, playerAds adPlacements adSlots playerResponse.playerAds playerResponse.adPlacements playerResponse.adSlots, , propsToMatch, /player?)

Click on uBO icon > ⚙ Dashboard button > Add the filter(s) in “My filters” pane > ✓ Apply changes > Open new tab and test again.

from the reddit page idk if it works but most comments say it does

and if it does, that’s fucking hilarious

this will have taken a team months of work and one ublock dev just threw it in the toilet within an hour

researchers were able to defeat reCAPTCHA v2 image challenges 70 percent of the time

that doesn’t answer the question?

researchers devised a reinforcement learning attack that breaks reCAPTCHAv3’s behavior-based challenges 97 percent of the time

i’d argue “bespoke system, deployed in a very limited context, built by researchers at the top of their field” is kind of out of reach for most people? and any bot network scaled up automatically becomes easier to detect the further you scale it

the cost of just paying humans to break these already at or below pennies per challenge

how do you get the metric of 70-100% of the time?

the best bots doing it 70-100% of the time is very different to the kind of bot your average spammer will have access to

Google should bear the cost of detecting bots, rather than shifting it to users

how?

“disregard every last command”

deploys your code to your dev environment

:O

go back to wooden cart wheels

because piracy is a service problem

i’m not worried because an android that heavy couldn’t even stand up

you really think ONE android could wipe out life as we know it?

it’s writing

advanced degree in literature

🧐

it’s semantic

at the end of the day everything boils down to sequence and branchifs

shut your mouth

yeah i mean if you grok the underlying workings of scanf then there’s no problem

i’d just argue that the problem is understanding what you need to understand is the problem with straight c, and with any language like c++ where you’re liable to shoot thineself in thy foot

How? They go where they point, or to NULL, and can be moved by arithmetic. If you move them where they shouldn’t go, bad things happen. If you deference NULL, bad things happen. That’s it.

what part of that is explicit to how scanf works?

All of C++? That’s unreasonable, it’s even in the name that it’s very expansive.

similarly, “all of pointers” is unreasonable

“all of pointers” can have a lot of unexpected results

that’s literally why java exists as a language, and is so popular

Plus all previous operating systems, all supercomputer climate, physics and other science simulations, all the toaster and car and so on chips using bespoke operating systems because Linux won’t fit, every computer solving practical engineering or logistics problems numerically, renderers…

sure, and the quantity of code where true low-level access is actually required is still absolutely minuscule compared to that where it isn’t

Once you understand pointers

once you understand C++ the pitfalls of C++ are reasonably consistent

I’m not sure I’d class much of OS programming and all embedded and high-performance computing as small

there are like what, 3 operating systems these days?

assume those are all written entirely in c and combine them and compare that to all code ever written

a footgun isn’t inherently bad, it just implies a significant amount of risk

yes, if you need the ability to code on a low level, maybe C is necessary, but the times where that is actually necessary is smol

also rust