Hard to tell from the article how likely this is to happen. Their legal situation is very complicated and it sounds like they are still trying to figure out what can and cannot be done.

Unit tests used to be more trouble than they were worth most of the time, now I love them.

Sounds like you were writing bad unit tests and AI showed you how to do it right.

For a moment there I wondered how can someone be seen in this situation and not die of embarrassment but them I remembered only huge assholes own those.

🥲

How about you put their CEOs into orbit?

They said in the article they recreated it on their own. So it couldn’t just be the proof of concept.

This could mean they just put the files from the exploit on a drive and reproduced it. The author of the exploit claims it’s very complex and no one knows how it works yet.

Under cover/covert operations do actually happen.

So what’s the scenario they are protecting themselves against? Someone catching the agent right after they unlocked some encrypted drive with the USB drive still on them? It sounds very far fetched to me that FBI would request a backdroor from Microsoft with this very specific requirement. I think it’s more likely they would cover it on their side with some easily erasable USB drive. Plus such a solution would also let them get rid of the backdoor if they are caught before they used it.

When you see someone with those take out your phone and take a closeup picture of them. See how they like it…

The elites are fine. They hope that when the empire collapses they will jut split it into corpo-states.

Why people are saying that the files being deleted indicate a backdoor? This is clearly to be executed while having access to the laptop. So it’s not like I’m tricking someone into connecting the USB drive and after the PC is infected I want to get rid of the evidence. If some FBI agent is using a USB drive to unlock a laptop at work, what’s the point of making the drive single use?

This could also be part of the PoC created by the researcher, not part of the backdoor.

You’re saying the activist where not allowed to testify? I doubt that. This covers offenses specified in Schedule 1 and not specified in Schedule 1 so anything can apply.

But most importantly, aggravating is a very concrete thing. Jury doesn’t have to know anything about it because it’s not a charge. There’s a charge that the jury decides upon and aggregating/mitigating circumstances that the judge decides. The central claim of the article, that the activist will be sentenced for some crimes the jury didn’t know about is pure manipulation.

I imagine they can fight the verdict in higher court and they can appeal the aggregation and maybe it will be determined that the judge was wrong here but what the article implies is simply a lie.

But they don’t have bodies. We could change their fiscal residence to prison…

I’m just kidding. It’s of course people who made those decisions and should go to jail but in US they will just claim company did it and they just have to pay some fine.

But it was a company that did it. You can’t put a company in prison.

The aggravation is terrorist connection , not terrorism. They don’t have to be convicted of terrorism for the terrorism connection aggravation to apply.

https://sentencingcouncil.org.uk/guidelines/offences-with-a-terrorist-connection-guidance/

From what I’ve read Schedule 1 are terrorism related charges. As you can see terrorist connection aggravation can be applied to crimes covered and not covered by Schedule 1.

The main dispute is broadly between developed and developing countries. Negotiating blocs such as the Group for Equity and the Africa Group want a standard contract that makes it mandatory for pharmaceutical companies to share any medical products developed as a result of countries sharing dangerous pathogens with them.

Several European countries have argued this could stifle research and development and reportedly proposed a hybrid model, with a mix of mandatory and voluntary requirements.

It’s all about the monieeeeesssss

And people keep believing it.

At this point I’m not sure anyone believes it. I think everyone is just hoping there will still be enough suckers down the road to make some money before it collapses.

People need to read about Aggravation

Isn’t it more like they accused them of damaging property, the jury agreed that they did damage property and the judge decides that the damage was serious enough to fall under terrorism? It’s like mitigating circumstances. The jury decides if a parson did X but it’s up to the judge to decide if any mitigating circumstances should apply before sentencing. Here the circumstances are aggravating.

Ok, I won’t.

Paraphrasing Veep:

“Satya Nadella keep track of all the important decisions in the company to ensure that all contracts comply with our commitment towards privacy. That being said he knew nothing about it and once he found out he immediately fired his number five director and a couple of sixes.”

Wow, I thought it’s some small open source project, not a startup with millions in funding. This gives off really weird vibe.

According to Tangled, the rise of AI-assisted coding has led to nearly a 50 per cent increase in professional developers over the last three years.

And I have no idea WTF are they talking about. 50% more professional developers in 3 years? I stopped reading after that.